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,fa18fb47ddd229a7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-11 07:48:31 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!verio!newsfeed.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Proposed change to BC iterator parameters [limitedness] Date: 11 Dec 2003 10:48:30 -0500 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: pip1-5.std.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1071157710 1452 192.74.137.185 (11 Dec 2003 15:48:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:48:30 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3376 Date: 2003-12-11T10:48:30-05:00 List-Id: "amado.alves" writes: > I think there are (container) libraries that accept limited element > types. And some libs that dont can easily (?) be changed in that > direction. But as I indicated I think it is 'unatural' to store values > of a limited type. For me it does not make sense to put constants in a > container. So my advice can only be: rethink your program. Heh? Limited is not the same thing as constant. It makes perfect sense to store limited objects in containers. *Some* containers require copying to get the data in and out of the container; limited components do not make sense in *that* case. But other containers can deal with limited types just fine. Why do you think Ada allows arrays of tasks? An array is a container, and tasks are about as limited as you can get! - Bob