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,c3a7c1845ec5caf9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney) Subject: Re: Equality operator overloading in ADA 83 Date: 1997/04/26 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 237624159 References: <01bc4e9b$ac0e7fa0$72041dc2@lightning> <335CAEFE.35DC@elca-matrix.ch> <335E0A26.16D0@elca-matrix.ch> <33692089.5794807@news.airmail.net> Organization: Estormza Software Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-04-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: ><<>I mean, to append a single character to this array, I just want to >>increment the discrim, and stick the character in the array. But Ada >>rules require me to do an assignment on the whole thing. > >Another outstanding reason why Ada never became popular for desktop >applications. String manipulation with the Ada standard string types is a >major pain in the butt, and amazingly inefficient.>> > >That seems completely specious reasoning. Furthermore, that example had nothing to do with type String, really. The discussion was about efficiently implementing a bounded buffer; it could have been any (non-limited) type, not just character arrays. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Matthew Heaney Software Development Consultant (818) 985-1271