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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,dbcfe2b0a74da57e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Inherited Methods and such
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:08:48 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1190927328.753361.138630@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
References: <1190239986.762473.204290@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
   <1rw45b3rmvmcr$.1df4wst5oknbl$.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1190296353.624737.150940@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>
   <11m13st1f92kf$.m8s6y8mc8ebk.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1190321119.206313.65290@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>
   <egz670qwxgyj$.15oz5zin5794w$.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1190408526.100291.265040@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
   <9ukf2wtqjs0q$.iuijmal4x56b$.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1190497995.498679.119190@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
   <1mw3qju08q8uj.sgzht7ld9ydc$.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1190579805.451187.71140@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
   <1i8ksr774bjbj.vpmnx3c0i9qz.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1190646125.024072.310020@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
   <1r9s9v6pcjifl.vp4ktk0unpd1.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1190753631.240548.101820@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
   <wccodfppqg6.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
   <1190842629.099822.65770@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
   <fdeqsd$9pd$1@jacob-sparre.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.3.107.199
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1190927328 27962 127.0.0.1 (27 Sep 2007 21:08:48
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 21:08:48 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <fdeqsd$9pd$1@jacob-sparre.dk>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US;
 rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070725 Firefox/2.0.0.6,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.3.107.199;
   posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:2169
Date: 2007-09-27T14:08:48-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 27 Wrz, 01:47, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote:

> No, the problem is quite obviously with T. (Re)-dispatching within
> Initialize is a sure-fire way to have a disaster.

1. I don't have to redispatch from Initialize, I can do this from
subprogram S1, which was called from S2, which was called from ... SN,
which was called from Initialize.

2. The fact that there is a disaster is exactly my point. The
interpretation differs, though. :-)

> I wouldn't go as far as Dmitry
> and disallow all redispatching, but it surely should not happen until the
> object is fully constructed.

Bingo. The only "issue" is that Ada does not acknowledge this
"progressive" nature of construction and there is no recognized place
for being not fully constructed.

> (I suspect the same is true while it is being
> finalized

Yes. The tag should progressively "degrade" during subsequent stages
of finalization.

--
Maciej Sobczak
http://www.msobczak.com/