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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,5f7230830b229a11 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-07 09:13:51 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-01!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!freenix!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: "amado.alves" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: RE: FW: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 17:08:22 +0100 Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1065543104 90034 80.67.180.195 (7 Oct 2003 16:11:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 16:11:44 +0000 (UTC) To: Return-Path: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6470.0 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: RE: FW: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? thread-index: AcOM7Ts6S52MN6LfTsG4bu/D8x4Yig== X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Oct 2003 16:05:50.0038 (UTC) FILETIME=[E0558F60:01C38CEC] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p5 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:381 Date: 2003-10-07T17:08:22+01:00 Craig Carey wrote: > On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:56:56 +0100, M=E1rio Amado Alves=20 > wrote: > > > >Bounded_String is useful--and actually used by people.=20 > However I don't=20 > >agree with multiplying every string-related tool by the three string=20 > >versions. Please do them for String only. Keep the ARM small. > > >=20 > That suggests balancing reasoning, so on balance your=20 > conclusion is to be rejected. One grounds for that could be:=20 > "Bounded Strings is a useful package." There may not be any=20 > principle saying that the RM has to be small. What can be=20 > discarded (even if ignoring your hints that your view is=20 > wrong) is the balancing. At the time of Ada 95, a rationale=20 > was formulated and followed. If there is a rationale in words=20 > behind the idea "keep the ARM small" then do state that for me. I meant *Ada.Strings.Bounded* is useful, not bounded strings everywhere. = Just one variety is enough for the each tool, given that there are = already conversion utilities to/from the other varieties. How would you = regard multiplying Ada.Text_IO by all string varieties? To my knowledge there is no written rationale for keeping the ARM small, = but I perceive it as a tacit requirement--and actually indicated by some = people, specially educators. And I fear that multiplying each tool by every string variety can = consume the 'very finite' ARG and community resources that could be = devoted to more needed things e.g. persistent containers. "Keep the ARM small" is backed up by these *two* forces.