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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,103b407e8b68350b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-15 09:23:39 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!spool0900.news.uu.net!reader0902.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:23:36 -0500
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Anybody in US using ADA ? One silly idea..
References: <mailman.1041817083.31051.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <avc2tk$e3qv9$1@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <1041908422.928308@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <kegl1vsa5tjnkuo04ckgt78b3lsn5j0ium@4ax.com>
 <1041997309.165001@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <avh8fs$fni6s$2@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <1042086217.253468@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <avmj4i$gh335$2@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <1042477504.547640@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <b044a1$l4p22$1@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
In-Reply-To: <b044a1$l4p22$1@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: KBC Financial Products
Message-ID: <1042651417.215661@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Cache-Post-Path: master.nyc.kbcfp.com!unknown@nightcrawler.nyc.kbcfp.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.1 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.253.250.10
X-Trace: 1042651418 reader2.ash.ops.us.uu.net 5278 204.253.250.10
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:33043
Date: 2003-01-15T12:23:36-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> I think I explained why. But to avoid that discussion again, just take the 
> unit solution for C++ you mentioned and try to implement a calculator for 
> dimensioned values using it.

No, I don't want to do that. If I did want to do that,
my solution would be inappropriate, but so what? Part
of designing a program is deciding what is fixed at
compile-time and what is decided at run-time. Ada has
ranged types where the ranges are fixed at compile-time,
and records whose field names are fixed at compile-time,
and procedures whose parameters are fixed at compile-time.
Similarly, it has generics whose parameters are fixed at
compile-time. When I know what I need at compile-time,
why should I be required to funnel it through a mechanism
which is designed for run-time variation?