From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on ip-172-31-65-14.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,NICE_REPLY_A, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Niklas Holsti Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: New aggregates with Ada 2022. Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 08:36:21 +0300 Organization: Tidorum Ltd Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net onqX7FruQkea4HoU0IhSigTC+Sg//93ki2dluklVF6OZ1QsGHN Cancel-Lock: sha1:0I5F0oII1GqGnbNbDsVoaE7yXpA= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1 Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:64038 List-Id: On 2022-06-28 0:37, Randy Brukardt wrote: > > Slices are not an abstraction. They are a way to describe a particular kind > of processor operation in a vaguely abstract way. The abstraction is the concept of a one-dimensional array (a vector or a sequence). Slicing such an object -- taking a subsequence -- seems a very natural operation to me, even on the abstraction level. > The distributed overhead that they [slices] cause is immense (for > instance, you can't have a discontigious array represesentation with > slices, Why would you want to have a non-contiguous representation for one-dimensional arrays? Perhaps to make "unbounded" (extensible) arrays?