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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,82c7a4dae672250f,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: gauthier@unilim.fr (Michel Gauthier) Subject: Re: Comments on generic stack? Date: 1996/03/15 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 142997479 references: <4i6l2t$j1q@dmsoproto.ida.org> organization: Universite de Limoges newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-03-15T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <4i6l2t$j1q@dmsoproto.ida.org>, wheeler@aphrodite.csed.ida.org (David Wheeler) wrote: >> [...] >> >> Below is yes, yet another implementation of an unbounded stack. This one >> supports assignment (:=), equality (=), and finalizes correctly, as >> well as supporting the tried and true Pop and Push operations. >> It's a generic that requires the Item to have := and =, but since the >> stack itself has those operations it is composable (you can have a >> Stack of Stacks of Integers). Sorry to disturb, but I cannot understand what is a stack of stacks. Stacks are designed to organise values, not objects. Stacks are objects, not values. How can you define stacks of stacks ? David probably means either stacks of (item=>references to stacks) or stacks of (item=> some implementation of the stack abstract type with an initial algebra behaviour). The latter actual type is an academic feature that has strictly no practical use. ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- Michel Gauthier / Laboratoire d'informatique 123 avenue Albert Thomas / F-87060 Limoges telephone +33 () 55457335 [or ~ 7232] fax +33 () 55457315 [or ~7201] ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- La grande equation de la fin du siecle : windows-X = Mac-Y The main end-of-century equation : windows-X = Mac-Y ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- Si l'an 2000 est pour vous un mysticisme stupide, utilisez la base 9 If you feel year 2000 a stupid mystic craze, use numeration base 9 ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------