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-Thread: 103376,a0833bbed8752e1f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsread.com!newsprint.newsread.com!news.glorb.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!a6202946!not-for-mail From: Jeffrey Carter Organization: jrcarter commercial-at acm [period | full stop] org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: variable length strings References: <1861614.TWv5A9FgVL@linux1.krischik.com> <4178e979_1@baen1673807.greenlnk.net> <1195374.UMjBCk7lO1@linux1.krischik.com> <1154613.ipZcUgduzp@linux1.krischik.com> <1174011.lJ1dcgRM3Q@linux1.krischik.com> <1098814048.280053@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <10z8k19febkic.16ex86io5uvwi.dlg@40tude.net> <1ok9c1htwcrmd.dta4w50brarb.dlg@40tude.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <6Nggd.5296$kM.4369@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 01:11:30 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.184.8.186 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net 1099012290 63.184.8.186 (Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:11:30 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:11:30 PDT Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5812 Date: 2004-10-29T01:11:30+00:00 List-Id: Randy Brukardt wrote: > > C is broken so Ada should be too? That makes *no* sense. It was certainly not my intention to imply that; I'm merely cataloguing the behavior of different systems. So far I've tried GNAT, ObjectAda, and gcc C. I have an old Janus/Ada 83 for DOS somewhere, but I'll take your word that it behaves differently. > Huh? A null line without a line terminator would be indistinguishable > from a line terminator at the end of a file. So it is perfectly > reasonable for an implementation to treat this as reading past the > end of a file (Janus/Ada certainly does too). Indeed, I'd argue that > it is impossible for there to be a null line without a line > terminator at the end of a file. I think we violently agree about this. > The case I'm talking about is when the last line is *not* null and > there is no explicit line terminator. In that case, the > implementation should provide an implicit line terminator, as the > logical view of a file is that it is always there (see A.10(7)), and > (IMHO) it is unreasonable to refuse to properly process a file that > is missing one. And about this, too. -- Jeff Carter "In the frozen land of Nador they were forced to eat Robin's minstrels, and there was much rejoicing." Monty Python & the Holy Grail 70