Re: Generators/coroutines in future Ada?

[Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>]

Paul Rubin wrote:

> Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> writes:
>> every algorithm can be done with OOP...
>> So the question is not whether an equivalent algorithm can be coded, but
>> whether it can be done naturally and explicitly.
> 
> There is a fairly natural bijection between OOP and closures, if that's
> what you're asking.

I am asking for the easier (smaller code) side of the bijection. That 
generator functions with "yield" (in Python sense) can be replaced with 
another side of the bijection does not necessarily mean that we should use 
the more long code side of the bijection, when we have shorter and probably 
easier to understand (and thus probably more reliable) code at the another 
side of the bijection.

>> Is it possible to add explicit generator functions to Ada?
> 
> I don't know if Ada has syntactic support for traversing a container by
> calling some method on it.  C++ and Python both have that and I doubt it
> would be a big deal to add it to Ada if it's not there already.

I am not about syntactic support for traversing a container by calling some 
method of it (certainly both Ada, Python, and C++) do support it.

I am about iterators coded as a function with "yield" construct (in Python 
sense). I am not about iterators coded with plain OOP without using "yield" 
or a similar construct.

-- 
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org