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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8276b2994037cd71
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: disjoint ranges ?
Date: 2000/10/16
Message-ID: <wcc4s2c91it.fsf@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 682121638
Sender: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
References: <39E612C9.9BF98CD3@laas.fr> <39E75AE3.90F858CE@ix.netcom.com>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-10-16T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Lao Xiao Hai <laoxhai@ix.netcom.com> writes:

> The problem of disjoint ranges came up for me many years ago on a
> different project.  I even suggested this as a capability for Ada 9X,
> but my suggestion either fell through the cracks or I submitted it
> incorrectly.

I don't think it fell through the cracks, and you probably submitted it
correctly.  It was simply judged to be too much added complexity for too
little gain.  That doesn't mean it's a dumb idea -- it just means that
the trade-off was not worth it.

- Bob