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: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.223.40 with SMTP id qr8mr7652242pbc.0.1341140265342; Sun, 01 Jul 2012 03:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Path: l9ni5735pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Brian Drummond Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X? Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 10:57:44 +0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5> <1hfh4rai2wgtv$.umqxi3ytqb26.dlg@40tude.net> <9u8bir7eh9b9$.14ofpjnotvg12$.dlg@40tude.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Injection-Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 10:57:44 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="DkTdSjxOCm6DqG+Uf7eArg"; logging-data="7030"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19hFHUMA+qsoN+0G0wZwgVYnCSlopmnb/s=" User-Agent: Pan/0.135 (Tomorrow I'll Wake Up and Scald Myself with Tea; GIT 30dc37b master) Cancel-Lock: sha1:MB+3RTqshq44jevwCoBLp0ZV5+c= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: 2012-07-01T10:57:44+00:00 List-Id: On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 10:25:07 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 21:06:15 +0000 (UTC), Brian Drummond wrote: > >> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 20:43:17 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 17:00:46 +0000 (UTC), Brian Drummond wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 14:34:10 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: >>> >>>>> Code review and maintainability problems. The set of symbols cannot >>>>> be infinite. >>>> >>>> Practical considerations surely restrict the length of additional >>>> operators, but I'm not sure that restriction belongs in the syntax. >>> >>> I didn't meant length. I think that the number of operators should be >>> small to be memorizable. All symbols should be predefined, e.g. from >>> the Unicode page. >> >> A symbol is not necessarily a single character; "<=" already isn't. > > This is an ASCII artefact. With Unicode adopted, there is no need in > such tricks. BTW, less-that-or-equal is one character: U+2264. But until ASCII and/or Latin-1 are fully obsoleted, it is an artefact that must be supported. Therefore there are operators that are more than one character. >> And restricting the sequence length necessarily restricts the number of >> possible identifiers, so I'm not clear what you are suggesting. ... > That is. No user-defined sequences. But an extended set of built-in symbols for operators, only supported where full Unicode is available? - Brian