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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7ee10ec601726fbf
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-01 11:03:44 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: "Matthew Heaney" <mheaney@on2.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: why not
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:06:59 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <tu374frvic9ebb@corp.supernews.com>
References: <3BC5D730.DA950CC7@boeing.com> <9q4pa7$1ad$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <slrn9sdahp.k4.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de> <3BC6ACC8.23EF21BC@free.fr>
 <QQCx7.26073$ev2.34583@www.newsranger.com> <3BC71F54.1FFE78FA@boeing.com>
 <1KGx7.26476$ev2.35117@www.newsranger.com> <3BC7AD82.2A0CCCD4@acm.org>
 <usncjtzix.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov> <9qhiqr$af0$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <K1Zy7.12219$hT5.3979715684@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>
 <1nDC7.180$6S7.92255364@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
 <9rjsak$bp3$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <jbfstt097fvrrqmrl0kuscmbl57neg8imf@4ax.com>
 <9rmhb9$o1b$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BDEF0FE.B55FED9E@san.rr.com>
 <9rmuqi$es$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BDF1F13.4B99361C@san.rr.com>
 <9rnbtv$5i4$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BE03E54.57E0E6C8@san.rr.com>
 <3BE0F8AE.3B7E5C70@home.com> <9rroi6$9rs$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <tu2t7oiig3e9d9@corp.supernews.com> <9rrvvh$d16$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15566
Date: 2001-11-01T14:06:59-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> wrote in
message news:9rrvvh$d16$1@nh.pace.co.uk...
> "Matthew Heaney" <mheaney@on2.com> wrote in message
> news:tu2t7oiig3e9d9@corp.supernews.com...
> Yes there would. Start working through all the combinations of stuff that
> are being proposed:
>
> (((Single List/Double List) * (Sorted/Unsorted)) + Map) *
> (Bounded/Unbounded) * (Task Safe/Task Unsafe)
>
> Thats 20 variants right there.

No.  These are variants you invented.

There is no such thing as a "sorted" vs "unsorted" list.

There is no such thing as a "task safe" vs "task unsafe" list.

Something tells me you don't really understand the STL.  There is *one*
algorithm for sorting, and it works for any kind of container.

> We can easily envision other variants such as
> Private/Limited-Private or Inherited/Generic. That's 80. The problem is to
> get the number of variants down to some manageable level that covers some
> reasonable amount of turf and will satisfy the largest possible body of
> users. Too many variants makes it a) complex and b) unlikely to be
realized.

Then don't do it that way.  I certainly don't intend to!

> That's why I would suggest limiting the first cut to a Double List
> (Sorted/Unsorted) & Map of Unbounded, Task Unsafe variety. That gets you
> down to 3 key packages that would probably cover a large percentage of the
> uses.

I said start with one: doubly-linked unbounded list.