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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!gandalf.srv.welterde.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: When to use Bounded_String?
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 18:42:44 -0600
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <p24325$gnl$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: <ouqpnm$a2j$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <0cc30dc8-4528-4e5c-91dd-24dfbe3cbcb2@googlegroups.com>
 <96764e4c-48df-4042-845e-12341149bc87@googlegroups.com>
 <p22mdb$1s3d$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <158d76ca-7061-400e-8077-222bd4e390d2@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 00:42:45 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="17141"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:49685
Date: 2017-12-28T18:42:44-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Mehdi Saada" <00120260a@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:158d76ca-7061-400e-8077-222bd4e390d2@googlegroups.com...
> Why hasn't GNATCOLL become part of the standard, since it's made
> by Adacore (correct me if I'm wrong), is alleguedly so better than 
> Ada.Strings,
> and since GNAT is now the de-facto only fully-ceritified Ada 2012 compiler 
> ?

(1) Adacore has nothing (directly) to do with the Standard, other than 
financial support of ARG members.
(2) No one has volunteered to do the work of converting the packages into 
the form of Standard. This is a LOT of effort (and I know, having done that 
with what became Ada.Directories and Ada.Calendar.Arithmetic -- which 
started out life as Claw packages).
(3) Parts of GNATColl are very much dependent on GNAT, while the Standard 
remains independent of any particular implementation. (We don't want GNAT to 
be the only Ada 2012 compiler forever!)
(4) It's debatable if GNATColl is really better than Ada.Strings.
(5) In general, we've not wanted many different libraries in the Standard 
that do the same thing. If a replacement for Ada.Strings was to be adopted, 
it would have to provide much better functionality than the existing 
libraries, not just a small performance improvement.

                                        Randy.