Re: Mixing operators and dot notation

["Alejandro R. Mosteo" <alejandro@mosteo.com>]

On 06/06/16 10:14, briot.emmanuel@gmail.com wrote:
>> My solution used a base generic as formal for all subsequent formals,
>> and it was the first time I saw the need for that, so it was quite engaging.
>
> it is indeed a powerful approach.
> The Ada standard calls them signature packages, other languages sometimes
> call them traits. D calls them policy-based containers, I think.
>
>
> We are working on a containers library using this, so that algorithms, for instance,
> can be made independent of containers, and that users can configure a lot of the
> behavior of containers (checks or not, bounded or not, definite or indefine
> elements) by the proper usage of formal package parameters.
> See https://github.com/AdaCore/ada-traits-containers if you want more info.
>
> Look at the docs for some of the rationales behind the current design choices.

Now I remember I saw some discussion about this project. Perhaps in 
AdaCore's blog? Thanks, I will take a look.

Álex.