From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,a84eaf8fb2470909 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.megapath.net!news.megapath.net.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 20:39:48 -0600 From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <1166710494.869393.108730@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <17fe4xfogg7p5.1dcyc5nyc2gsl.dlg@40tude.net> <1166805696.291429.239590@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com> <186qujlcx6rwl.1h6eq4mbdaa5s$.dlg@40tude.net> <1167150212.165097.289010@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com> <1qmdvus6du3xu.1n21tzgev46ia$.dlg@40tude.net> <1167246396.057028.325080@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com> <15jxp8z1iu5fk.1oeihvavjghgg$.dlg@40tude.net> <986dnZ745O_nwQnYnZ2dnUVZ_ua3nZ2d@megapath.net> <136rh3gzy2wpd.agw4naavc1ge$.dlg@40tude.net> Subject: Re: Ada generics Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 20:40:46 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.32.209.38 X-Trace: sv3-iDE6L8zA5LoqHyntgn5FCST0Q5R/T2opuqT5M7DbAe2FzhLxc9J+5Nrt/YFF5eM69oVC83RtKBtLCzT!VRUn1XOxPu3Vkcg1r6+UrEwX1h4Xuz0SKUjt8VRhlO+s9NbtoNJ+yI9Q1xsSH19rHTazUSPKaIR/!lvkMN/Nsclw7nw== X-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8043 Date: 2006-12-29T20:40:46-06:00 List-Id: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote in message news:136rh3gzy2wpd.agw4naavc1ge$.dlg@40tude.net... ... > > This is more complicated than the English-only definition, but it was > > thought to be mandatory to get approval of a new standard. (This sort of > > internationalization is being required of all languages: C++ has a number of > > proposals on the table for handling this as well.) It's also a ramification > > of case insensitivity - the only alternative would be to completely abandon > > it, and that would be very bad for compatibility with Ada 95. > > I don't see why letters of identifiers must be all Unicode letters. I > wouldn't allow anything but Latin. In any case it just cannot be > open-ended. Because higher ups at ISO/IEC has said that such things need to be allowed. If you want an ISO/IEC standard, you have to be responsive to their wishes. Personally, I think anything beyond 8-bit characters is going too far (even for strings): if it's not worth doing in English, its not worth doing! [For me, the universe revolves around Madison, WI and everyone should speak (American) English (dropping all of those other archaic languages) so that everyone can communicate without unnecessary barriers. This is very similar to my stand on Ada vs. other programming languages. But I'm not particularly surprised when someone disagrees with any of those positions... ;-)] And it's not "open-ended". It follows a published standard (Unicode), just like the earlier versions of Ada followed other published standards (ISO/IEC 10646 in the case of Ada 95). In any case, Unicode identifiers are part of the Ada Amendment. And I would be very surprised if we went backwards on that; such a change would be very incompatible. (I personally don't believe that many programs will use Unicode identifiers, but it's likely to be non-zero, maybe 5%.) Randy.