Re: Strange crash on custom iterator

["Dan'l Miller" <optikos@verizon.net>]

On Wednesday, July 4, 2018 at 1:06:17 PM UTC-5, Shark8 wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 4, 2018 at 11:51:20 AM UTC-6, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> > 
> > It would be nice if the encoding and character set of a string were
> > "implementation details".  I'm not sure how to do it, but I think it is
> > worth trying to find a solution for Ada.  (I think I was introduced to
> > how the KDE library does it once, but IIRC only encoding was abstracted
> > away.)
> 
> Indeed so!
> This is the way we /should/ have strings; where [[Wide_]Wide_]String are all generic with things like 'character-set' and 'search' and 'encoding' as formal parameters.
> 
> Sadly this will likely never happen because it would break backwards compatibility.

Then do it outside of the standardization process in a Boost-esque library on GitHub/GitLab/SourceForge to launch a de facto standard that establishes ISO's vaunted ‘established industry practice’.  If C++ can do it, then so can Ada.

That being said, I believe that a far better model than Boost's exists for the cream rising to the top.  Instead of battle-of-the-emails-establishes-king-of-the-hill dominance hierarchies (with all due respect to the esteemed Jordan Peterson), I would recommend multiple concurrently-competing library designs, then a rigorous (repeated? annual?) bake-off among the competitors, evaluating multiple criteria:  runtime performance, engineering-time design flexibility/tunabilty/ease-of-use, maintainability over time.  Oh, call them the Yellow, Blue, Red, and Green libraries.  Who did •that• before for language definition?  …  but for potential standard library content instead this time.