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!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!newsfeed.xs3.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: Ada 202x and square brackets
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:24:57 -0600
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <q4nfgq$r4r$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: <f0886b90-11b5-48b5-8a9e-da9ad33a2a65@googlegroups.com>
 <54a5873a-57aa-40c6-8af4-a6f908d53593@googlegroups.com>
 <b773bbfa-9fd0-431a-8ff3-462b2c5ccd15@googlegroups.com>
 <q4kov7$40n$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
 <be2e3cf3-e452-4501-a960-822bf6432cd9@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 00:24:58 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="27803"; 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: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:55621
Date: 2019-02-21T18:24:57-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Lucretia" <laguest9000@googlemail.com> wrote in message 
news:be2e3cf3-e452-4501-a960-822bf6432cd9@googlegroups.com...
> On Wednesday, 20 February 2019 23:47:53 UTC, Randy Brukardt  wrote:
>
>>              My_Arr : constant Some_Unconstrained_Array_Type := [1];
>>
>> Container aggregates are roughly user-defined array aggrgeates.
>> (Alternatively, you can [maybe should] think of an array as a built-in
>> container.)
>
> Do you think the language is getting a tad too complicated now?

How so? The idea has been that an abstract data type should be able to 
declare all of the same capabilities as a built-in type. The main remaining 
holes were literals and aggregates, and those have been addressed now.

It can be complicated to build such an ADT, but that's not something that is 
done often (much like with generics). OTOH, the user experience should be 
fairly seamless -- you can write the same thing whether or not the type is 
built-in or user-defined, and (if properly defined), they'll mean the same 
thing. Most people won't care how a user-defined aggregate is constructed 
any more than they care how a vector container supports indexing. (At least, 
that's the goal.)

                           Randy.