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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:ac8:25ac:: with SMTP id e41mr18715169qte.101.1560942865295; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 04:14:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a54:4003:: with SMTP id x3mr2296102oie.44.1560942864917; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 04:14:24 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!m24no2855317qtm.0!news-out.google.com!4ni131qtw.1!nntp.google.com!m24no2855306qtm.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 04:14:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a02:c7d:3c35:b000:325a:3aff:fe0f:37a5; posting-account=L2-UcQkAAAAfd_BqbeNHs3XeM0jTXloS NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a02:c7d:3c35:b000:325a:3aff:fe0f:37a5 References: <728c4668-8fa0-4a57-a502-2bf476fc3940@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <800240ae-4c5f-424e-869f-2791e07a50d2@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Latest suggestion for 202x From: Lucretia Injection-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 11:14:25 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:56679 Date: 2019-06-19T04:14:24-07:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, 19 June 2019 03:36:50 UTC+1, Micah Waddoups wrote: > On Sun, Jun 16, 2019, 15:41 'Lucretia' via comp.lang.ada=20 > > On Sunday, 16 June 2019 00:59:41 UTC+1, Micah Waddoups wrote: > >=20 > > > I have a suggestion, and I am sorry I haven't searched thoroughly to = see if someone has suggested this already, though I don't believe they have= . Unicode=20 > >=20 > > I have, search for it. > >=20 > > >and UTF are supported very well, however, the support is simply limite= d to the=20 > >=20 > > No, Ada's support for Unicode is bad, very bad, and broken. There is an= article about Ada's Unicode support by someone online, can't remember, thi= nks it was by Flyx. > >=20 > > Ada needs a full Unicode implementation and not one that layer after la= yer of abstration which makes it heavy as f***, sorry League, you're out! > >=20 > > All the existing string stuff needs to be redone with traits and moved = into string encoding type stuff. > >=20 > > Luke. >=20 >=20 > I agree, with consideration for true Unicode, however, as with Unifont, d= irect support for at least the literal characters covers perhaps 80% or mor= e of practical use in embedded programming and small programs. In this the= work done=20 And this is why Ada will never get out of embedded into other areas, becaus= e of this narrow minded thinking. > My intent is to acknowledge the conservative, carefully added support tha= t has been added already. As a programmer eager for advancement and practic= ally in love with the Ada language so far, I am in favor of being very cons= ervative when adding to or removing anything. The problem implied by our d= iscussion is that=20 I'm not, I think there needs to be some quite large sweeping changes. But t= hen, I'm looking at moving away from Ada now. >as a high and low level general purpose programming language, Ada is somet= imes called upon to handle standards or expectations that are very difficul= t to keep in the realm of Ada's standards, which are readability, maintaina= bility, as complete precision possible abstracted over all target platforms= , and integrity. =20 Unicode support can be made scalable, it's really not that difficult. >When full support for Unicode is someday added, I hope it is not too late = to be useful, but it needs to be right, and simple enough to apply the wide= range of applications or environments supported and considered by the Ada = standards. It has to be now for Ada to make a dent in the current language arena, esp = with Rust about. > As is often the case, I think if someone's implementation of Unicode supp= ort is correct enough, but small as well, it might be added to a compiler l= ibrary first. This would help some people and help those responsible for t= he next official standard of Ada to vet the techniques of that implementati= on for the most future prove way to accomplish it in the standard. =20 I was thinking about doing this but have decided on writing my own language= instead. My was this: 1) Follow String and Unbounded_String, by having a static length Unicode_St= ring which would be UTF8. Then have a number of iterators which act on the = basic array: a) The normal array iterator, built-in. b) Code-point iterator which returns, 32-bit code points. c) Grapheme cluster iterators. d) Other iterators, i.e. words. 2) Then the unbounded version which utilises the static stuff, same set of = iterators. 3) The character database with access via unicode names and index numbers. 4) Unicode regular expression engine. =20 For embedded only 1 needs to be built, for larger scale apps, you get the f= ull 4. Luke.