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: 103376,5c89acd494ea9116
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!feeder.news-service.com!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!newsfeed01.chello.at!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Self pointer in limited record
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.tsoh+bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
In-Reply-To: <1183631754.917400.257350@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
References: <1183577468.034566.57830@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
	 <juo4g99n23mu$.1g739a1n21zi2.dlg@40tude.net>
	 <1183631754.917400.257350@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1183634060.27307.3.camel@kartoffel>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 13:14:20 +0200
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 05 Jul 2007 13:13:45 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: dfafb24c.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=P90PEPBNUOEX36K@\WTHGJA9EHlD;3YcB4Fo<]lROoRAgUcjd<3m<;BD<=Jh[b_HGC=kbmW`a1fGGC`2T@AUZfCKNXT<l@]5;CH
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16420
Date: 2007-07-05T13:13:45+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 03:35 -0700, Maciej Sobczak wrote:
> On 5 Lip, 10:22, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:

> OK, makes sense. I have seen it used with rendezvous and I guess the
> motivation was similar.
> 
> > 2. to re-dispatch from primitive operations:
> >
> >    type T_Access is access all T'Class;  -- Note 'Class
> >    type T is  new Ada.Finalization.Limited_Controlled with record
> >       Self : T_Access := T'Unchecked_Access;
> >

> > Both defeat the type system in some sense and potentially indicate a
> > design problem.
> 
> I have seen it applied *regularly* in some Ada project, so it looked
> like "default" idiom for OO programming.

Hm, is this because programmers have liked to be able
to manipulate the object not via its interfaces and proper
command/query separation, but instead via direct access
provided by a this/self-pointer?