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: 103376,4f316de357ae35e9
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-08-26 11:53:14 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.tufts.edu!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!news
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: FAQ and string functions
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Message-ID: <wcc4rdhxxj8.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 18:52:43 GMT
References: <20020730093206.A8550@videoproject.kiev.ua>
 <4519e058.0207300548.15eeb65c@posting.google.com>
 <20020731104643.C1083@videoproject.kiev.ua>
 <4519e058.0208010629.5e6182ca@posting.google.com>
 <20020801194720.Q1080@videoproject.kiev.ua>
 <4519e058.0208020605.5ab7e092@posting.google.com>
 <3D4AAF63.72782659@san.rr.com> <3D4B2382.7030209@telepath.com>
 <3D4B2ACD.FDA29B9A@san.rr.com> <3D4B401E.3060802@telepath.com>
 <3D4B4477.500088B@san.rr.com> <slrnaksiv8.oo.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
 <3D4EA1AC.80D17170@s
 <wccofc6b66u.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <uofc518w0.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
 <wccd6s5y09r.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <akdsv9$1j26$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:28426
Date: 2002-08-26T18:52:43+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Chad R. Meiners" <crmeiners@hotmail.com> writes:

> "Robert A Duff" <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in message
> news:wccd6s5y09r.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com...
> > Not necessarily:
> >
> >     procedure P(X: String) is
> >         Y: String_Ptr := new String'(1..X'Length);
> >     begin
> >         Y.all := X; -- How fast is this?
> >
> > The amount of data copied is probably a run-time calculated value (not
> > "easily visible in the source"), and is different for each call to P.
> > In fact, one call to P might take a million times longer than another.
> 
> Yes, but the time bound on the assignment is blatantly visible; thus your
> "Not necessarily" doesn't hold for this example.

It's not blatantly visible to me.  Please explain.

Unless you mean that it copies at most Integer'Last bytes, which is not
a very *useful* bound.  More to the point, this time bound is very
different from the time bound for ":=" on, say, Integers.  Yet both use
the same ":=" notation.

- Bob