Re: Little people supporting Ada, possibly through AdaCore?

["Vasiliy Molostov" <molostoff@gmail.com>]

Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> писал(а) в своём письме Thu,  
19 Jul 2012 12:08:16 +0400:

> P.S. If you put book keeping in the elements, that is no more a set of
> original element. Yes it is equivalent to it in some sense. But so an
> ordered set would too

 From a user perspective:
potentially storage pools can copy of such sets, and elements within still  
have no known order. I suppose that for user an unknown order means no  
order.
Strictly speaking: sets do not require ordering, they require membership  
test. And from this point of view an ordered set is a conjunction of two  
"atomics": an "ordered" (<,>) and a "set" (ismember).


As for json this is a child of two: "ordered" and a "dict". So the  
resolution to gnat json impl is that it is half-implemented (missing  
"ordered") in terms of usual java developer. But perhaps this is not bad  
for ada developer?
-- 
Написано в почтовом клиенте браузера Opera: http://www.opera.com/mail/