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: a07f3367d7,4ce5890331a5b529
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!c32g2000vbq.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Discriminants of tagged types
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 01:55:09 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <1194ed91-2fe9-4695-8f3a-792b74ec4730@c32g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>
References: <14314714-e92c-4036-9cbb-da8e72489261@h7g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
 <wcc4oc7da32.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <a78d88bb-e202-49d5-a9fe-f38206efd4ea@j18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
 <wcczktzliw3.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <989c6412-8dbf-403c-9ce0-766e0e953fb6@u17g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
 <wcchbg7nogv.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.138.182.236
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1288256109 9698 127.0.0.1 (28 Oct 2010 08:55:09
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 08:55:09 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: c32g2000vbq.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.138.182.236;
 posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100722 Firefox/3.6.8,gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14885
Date: 2010-10-28T01:55:09-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 28 Pa=C5=BA, 02:35, Robert A Duff <bobd...@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:

> > This is especially reasonable if you take into account that in Ada
> > 2005 protected types can derive from interfaces. It would be very
> > inconsistent not to allow the same calling syntax across the whole
> > hierarchy, including the class-wide type.
>
> Good point. =C2=A0But I'd prefer to unify the syntax in the
> other direction.

And I would accept that other direction without any criticism, really.
The problem is that time has only one direction and now there is no
other option than to allow the dot syntax for everything.
In its current state, the language is inconsistent and only more
difficult to learn.

--
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com