From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!cleanfeed3-b.proxad.net!nnrp1-2.free.fr!not-for-mail
From: Thomas <fantome.forums.tDeContes@free.fr.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
Subject: Re: Ada and Unicode
References: <607b5b20$0$27442$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <86mttuk5f0.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <s5jr59$1tkq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <s5juep$1lbu$1@gioia.aioe.org> <s5jute$1s08$1@gioia.aioe.org> <s5k0ai$bb5$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2022 20:04:36 +0200
Message-ID: <fantome.forums.tDeContes-E8EAB8.20043603042022@news.free.fr>
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 03 Apr 2022 20:04:37 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 91.175.52.121
X-Trace: 1649009077 news-2.free.fr 13432 91.175.52.121:14286
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:63689
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <s5k0ai$bb5$1@dont-email.me>, "J-P. Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr> 
wrote:

> Le 19/04/2021 à 15:00, Luke A. Guest a écrit :
> > They're different types and should be incompatible, because, well, they 
> > are. What does Ada have that allows for this that other languages 
> > doesn't? Oh yeah! Types!
> 
> They are not so different. For example, you may read the first line of a 
> file in a string, then discover that it starts with a BOM, and thus 
> decide it is UTF-8.

could you give me an example of sth that you can do yet, and you could 
not do if UTF_8_String was private, please?
(to discover that it starts with a BOM, you must look at it.)


> 
> BTW, the very first version of this AI had different types, but the ARG 
> felt that it would just complicate the interface for the sake of abusive 
> "purity".

could you explain "abusive purity" please?

i guess it is because of ASCII.
i guess a lot of developpers use only ASCII in a lot of situation, and 
they would find annoying to need Ada.Strings.UTF_Encoding.Strings every 
time.

but I think a simple explicit conversion is acceptable, for a not fully 
compatible type which requires some attention.


the best would be to be required to use ASCII_String as intermediate, 
but i don't know how it could be designed at language level:

UTF_8_Var := UTF_8_String (ASCII_String (Latin_1_Var));
Latin_1_Var:= String (ASCII_String (UTF_8_Var));

and this would be forbidden :
UTF_8_Var := UTF_8_String (Latin_1_Var);

this would ensures to raise Constraint_Error when there are somme 
non-ASCII characters.

-- 
RAPID maintainer
http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/rapid/