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=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!NfdNc+Wt3EVimQY6QC0FdA.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Blady <p.p11@orange.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: [ANN] UXStrings package available (UXS_20220226).
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 22:13:31 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t1imts$cac$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <svm0pl$1tdr$2@gioia.aioe.org>
 <52dec3b7-d1ab-4637-a96e-7bde3cab95f4n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="12620"; posting-host="NfdNc+Wt3EVimQY6QC0FdA.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Content-Language: en-US
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:63632
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le 23/03/2022 à 10:42, Vincent D. a écrit :
> Le mardi 1 mars 2022 à 21:47:51 UTC+1, Blady a écrit :
>> Feedback is welcome on actual use cases.
> 
> Hello Pascal,
> Thank you very much for this great improvement over Unbounded Strings !
> Sure a short string optimization, such a the one implemented in GNATColl.XStrings, would be appreciated.
> As a personnal taste, I would appreciate to have a UXCharacter type that is a Wide_Wide_Character, and an ASCII_Character, or a Char that is a subtype of it.
> I think that the ASCII_String could be a derived type of UXString since it is a proper subtype, that specializes the UXString to only ASCII Characters. Some primitive operations can then be overriden to take advantage of the direct mapping between bytes and characters.

Hello Vincent,

I had some thoughts about "generic" Character concept and felt the user 
would mostly choose Unicode representation (same as Wide_Wide_Character) 
which brings the maximum available character set at a small cost of 4 bytes.
Ada standard library comes will all sort of conversion subprograms to 
ASCII, Latin-1...
Thus, for UXStrings, I choose Unicode_Character type as "generic" 
character (which renames Wide_Wide_Character), see for instance:
https://github.com/Blady-Com/UXStrings/blob/master/src/uxstrings1.ads#L58

May you be more specific?
What advantages for the user would bring a UXCharacter type?

egards, Pascal.