Re: Text_IO, was: Re: Something I don't understand

[Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP>]

On 2014-02-17, Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> wrote:
> This invites errors in matching the fragments in the format string with
> the variables in the variable sequence, just as in current
> template-based systems e.g. C. You add a variable, but forget to add the
> format fragment, et cetera. With the current method using string
> concatenation, the format parameters are automatically associated with
> the right variable, being parameters in the same Image call.
>

That could be caught at compilation time because there would be a
mismatch between the format string and the number of variables.

>
> So this is only *dynamically* type safe, not statically so. Moreover, as
> C formats already demonstrate, sooner or later one will run out of
> useful and unique letters and format forms, so a format fragment meant
> for variable X, of type T, may by mistake be applied to variable Y, of
> type S -- and will happen to be valid for that type, too, but will not
> produced the desired result.
>
>> And voila, C printf templates in a fully Ada type safe manner.
>
> No, dynamic type safety is not fully "Ada type safe". Ada is (mainly)
> statically type safe; dynamism only enters in subtype safety.
>

I see your point, but it's still better than what the C language itself
provides and it is guaranteed to catch type mismatches even if it's
deferred to runtime.

I wonder if it's possible to do something along the lines of gcc
which looks at the printf format string during compilation and
complains, during compilation, if there's a mismatch detected in
data types.

I am interested to see what Robert's detailed proposals look like or
what any other ideas for printf style template I/O might look like.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world