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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,dad94612ff745427
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!news2.volia.net!news.musoftware.de!news.weisnix.org!newsfeed.ision.net!newsfeed2.easynews.net!ision!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Instantiating private types with discriminants?
From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>
In-Reply-To: <2l9uhyhkrquy.1rbhnqk1k2u52$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <QD08g.28768$Nb2.521930@news1.nokia.com>
	 <gZ18g.28779$Nb2.521756@news1.nokia.com>
	 <jun15ub0lkbv$.lzbor2gy7cz7.dlg@40tude.net>
	 <ePg8g.28843$Nb2.523331@news1.nokia.com>
	 <1147252198.138173.203910@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
	 <A6m8g.29161$_k2.508345@news2.nokia.com>
	 <fzzy5qhg30ly$.9b18efgnknqc$.dlg@40tude.net>
	 <SJn8g.28928$Nb2.524951@news1.nokia.com>
	 <44623869$0$4504$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
	 <87d5elk8e9.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <HeidnX-p77c9_f_ZRVny1Q@pipex.net>
	 <i4rqev137oq1.161jykmec6dts.dlg@40tude.net>
	 <GzC8g.28985$Nb2.526015@news1.nokia.com>
	 <13byov3p0dqhk.yglz3nh5rpb8$.dlg@40tude.net>
	 <wccody4lfh2.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
	 <2l9uhyhkrquy.1rbhnqk1k2u52$.dlg@40tude.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: #
Message-ID: <1147425891.9012.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 11:24:52 +0200
NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 May 2006 11:24:00 MEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 17c8fd9a.newsread2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=7S;fDXIn6]>GKQ1;SL\gZ1Q5U85hF6f;4jW\KbG]kaM8[NGU2GAcMG:bVgGbg0HJn9=0F65HQV8i6iQ:TIkElR<6
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4213
Date: 2006-05-12T11:24:00+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 09:37 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:


> I beg to disagree. Semantic difference you are talking about is not always
> the problem space's one. It is often just a language artefact. In my view,
> exactly the opposite should be done, i.e. removing all traces of "all".
> (:-)) A user-defined pointer (referential) type should (IMO) be considered
> a subtype, that inherits all operations of the target type. If assignment
> gets overridden (to have shallow copy semantics), that does not
> automatically imply anything for other operations.

Will the programmer have a chance to express whether or not
he or she is effectively creating an alias?

Eiffel addresses this in a reversed way, I think. You can write
"expanded" before a class definition, or before the type name
in a feature declaration. So no ".all" either, but at least
a trace of objects versus references.