Re: Limited use for limited with?

[Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>]

On 5 Paź, 09:25, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote:

> >No way. There are *many* Registers, meaning that a single object can
> >be registered in several registries, not just one. Will you suggest
> >passing an array of registries to the constructor? I hope not.
>
> This sounds like chaos, not a design.

Let me guess: comp.lang.ada is the only group you are registered to,
right? And of course, you are subscribed to only one mailing list,
right?

The possibility to register somewhere should be orthogonal to the
number of registries. If I was able to subscribe to comp.lang.ada, I
want to be able to subscribe to several other groups, too. It's not a
chaos, it's an obvious result of decoupling.

> >The problem with your approach is that it tries to bend the design of
> >the system in order to work around some language limitation. I prefer
> >having it the other way round.
>
> The "design" sounds more like copying bad ideas from some other
> implementation for some other programming language.

This design does not contain any elements that would be particular to
"some other programming language", or at least you have not shown it
yet.
Access values are inherent part of Ada and for example Timing Events
(D.15) are nothing else but callback registries, so I don't think I'm
doing anything extraordinary or outside of the "Ada way".

In other words, "chaos" and "bad ideas" are not appropriate words
here.

> When you start with a poor design, it's not surprising you can only find
> poor solutions...

Translation: "I don't understand the purpose of the system, but the
fact that my proposed solutions are not adequate is a sure proof that
the original design must be broken." Is that right?

--
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com