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-Thread: 103376,95dad6602b955ce1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Lucretia" <lucretia9@lycos.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Problem with "limited with" in a *real* application
Date: 15 Oct 2005 06:48:19 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1129384099.251293.261930@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <1129043820.987947.200870@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
   <rNWdnWX7uLTwsdHeRVn-uQ@megapath.net>
   <1129136767.955381.143030@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1129215004.069760.84050@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1129220290.938615.36390@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
   <NOOdnQmN9-4GYdPenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@megapath.net>
   <1129302185.489627.266900@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <A9CdnTcDd6Em383enZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@megapath.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.74.199.42
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1129384104 13335 127.0.0.1 (15 Oct 2005 13:48:24
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 13:48:24 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0;
 Windows NT 5.1),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.0 Symantec_Web_Security (3.0.1.74),
 1.0 C2100-0050414028 (NetCache NetApp/5.5R5)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=194.74.199.42;
   posting-account=G-J9fgwAAADgpzBiEyy5tO4f8MX5fbpw
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5700
Date: 2005-10-15T06:48:19-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

<quote>
Here, the second parameter of New_Panel probably should be class-wide.
A
</quote>

Ok.

<quote>
subprogram with two specific different tagged types as parameters is
almost
always wrong. (Dmitry will tell you why in excrutating details if you
want
to know. :-)
</quote>

Yeah, why not ;-D Doesn't hurt to know.

<quote>
Presuming that this is an operation on the root window type, you should
be
able to just call this (a Button will have inherited it).

       Set_Validator (Self.Button, Self.Validator);
</quote>

Well, Button_Type is derived from Control_Type which in turn is derived
from Window_Type.

<quote>
(or, in C++-like notation in Ada 200Y:)
      Self.Button.Set_Validator (Self.Validator);

The latter notation avoids the need for use-clauses.
</quote>

I didn't know that.

<quote>
I don't see any need for the conversions to Sizer_Type here. If
Self.Sizer
is derived from Sizer_Type, then Add is inherited. Use that one without
a
conversion. (That way, if it becomes necessary to override it in the
future,
you'll use the overriding version for the type.) If it is actually
Sizer_Type, you don't need it.
</quote>

Add is defined in wx.Core.Sizer and the sizer I am using here is
derived from Sizer_Type (it's of Box_Sizer_Type), but by removing the
view conversions, the program doesn't compile for some reason.

<quote>
The only problem is figuring out where the routine ("Add" in this case)
is
declared, because you can't see inherited declarations. There are a
number
of solutions to that:
1) Have a use_clause for every package that declares a type that you
use. (I
hate this one myself.)
</quote>

I'm using this at the moment.

<quote>
2) Use dot notation to specify that the routine comes from the package
where
the type is declared;
3) or use the prefixed view call notation introduced by Ada 200Y:
    Self.Sizer.Add (Self.Scroll_Bar, 1, Sizer_Expand or
Sizer_Border_All,
</quote>

Hmmm, maybe 3 would be a good one?

Thanks,
Luke.