comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: Access to strings and string subtypes?
Date: 2000/03/17
Date: 2000-03-17T00:00:00+00:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <wcczorx1tkq.fsf@world.std.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 8atgul$i7l$1@nnrp1.deja.com

Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> writes:

> No one has answered the original question of WHY this annoying
> limitation is in Ada95. It is a (misguided in my opinion)
> worry about efficiency. It allows implementations to omit
> templates on objects with explicit bounds to save a little
> bit of space.

I don't think it was purely an efficiency issue.  I think we were
concerned that existing Ada 83 implementations were already doing that
optimization, and would have difficulty changing the way they represent
arrays.  So we might have decided differently if we were designing a new
language from scratch -- I'm not sure.

I agree that the restriction is somewhat annoying.

I also don't like rules that make arrays and discriminated types
gratuitously different -- in my opinion, bounds and discriminants are
(or at least *should* be) essentially the same thing.

- Bob




  reply	other threads:[~2000-03-17  0:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-03-16  0:00 Access to strings and string subtypes? Steve Folly
2000-03-16  0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
2000-03-16  0:00   ` Steve Folly
2000-03-17  0:00     ` Ehud Lamm
2000-03-17  0:00       ` Steve Folly
2000-03-17  0:00         ` Pascal Obry
2000-03-17  0:00       ` Larry Kilgallen
2000-03-17  0:00         ` Robert Dewar
2000-03-17  0:00           ` Robert A Duff [this message]
2000-03-18  0:00             ` Robert Dewar
2000-03-20  0:00               ` Tucker Taft
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-03-17  0:00 Christoph Grein
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox