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: 103376,5f5a48f21d7f7525 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: "John B. Matthews" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Inferring array index type from array object Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:50:18 -0400 Organization: The Wasteland Message-ID: References: <6b20ed09-efc1-4df7-90f9-5e141482e8d0@d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <1305oqccr1h2t$.x33x4oxwd84d$.dlg@40tude.net> <88ec2vF3uqU1@mid.individual.net> <88f9osFmcmU1@mid.individual.net> <88sld2F9m8U1@mid.individual.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: LQJtZWzu+iKlBROuDg+IUg.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X) Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:12961 Date: 2010-06-29T13:50:18-04:00 List-Id: In article , Warren wrote: > One thing that really irks me (in lack of convenience) > is the lack of certain functions in the library support. > For example, I was looking for the inverse of a complex > number function. Did I missed it? My googling didn't > turn up much, nor did grep on the package hdrs. > > So because it is missing (AFIK), I had to google it and > figure out how it is done and code it myself. Wouldn't it > be safer if the function was already provided and tested? > Wouldn't it also be more accurately coded (floating > point can be tricky)? At least it would be tested. > > IIRC, I ran into the similar issues with some other > functions (ATAN2??). The LOG10() issue was > resolved when I discovered there is a base argument > in LOG(), so that was just my own "user error". > > But even if a function is considered "trivial", I > think it would be "safer" to include it. Additionally, > having them provided means that they will > be coded for the best accuracy. So, what is the "missing" function? -- John B. Matthews trashgod at gmail dot com