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: 103376,5117b1b6391a0e06
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!prodigy.com!atl-c02.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!feed2.newsreader.com!newsreader.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!news.octanews.net!ash.uu.net!spool.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 12:32:54 -0400
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7 (Windows/20040616)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: A simple ADA puzzle (I haven't the answer)
References: <1087410710.477506@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <jhj2d010m9bj369vnt4oupomg37pni9lad@4ax.com>
 <1087474761.60413@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <7o83d0hf6sqgng2980e1tg7iu864m5m50u@4ax.com>
 <wvbr7ju5448r.fsf@europa1.Norway.Sun.COM>
 <1in5d05aa4rfqlt7e76gk87ucd3vuru6pm@4ax.com>
 <1087564576.388973@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <oks5d01bqstpdvbpr61cvc6dt0ethgmhnu@4ax.com>
 <1087575262.304708@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <pan.2004.06.19.09.31.38.944379@dmitry-kazakov.de>
 <sDsBc.12343$z24.7444@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <2i5dd0lu0i3a8bokfh7916r4j67g42ri4o@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <2i5dd0lu0i3a8bokfh7916r4j67g42ri4o@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: KBC Financial Products
Message-ID: <1087835574.625787@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: 1087835575  1398 204.253.250.10
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1745
Date: 2004-06-21T12:32:54-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> So it is inconsistent.

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds."

> That's another philosophy, the C++'s one: quick and dirty, or rather
> "let's first make it dirty, maybe it happens to be quick".

As opposed to Ada's "if we don't have it you don't need it",
like leaving procedure pointers out of Ada 83.

> Huh, how is it better than Ada's limitation on tagged types?

Access to automatic variables from local classes is not provided
because it causes implemenation difficulties which would spread
throught many aspects of the language. Ada's limitation on tagged
types has no such technical basis; it is there because someone
could accidentally use the construct incorrectly.