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: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.213.106 with SMTP id nr10mr13091464pbc.2.1335672245397; Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:04:05 -0700 (PDT) Path: r9ni110646pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Shark8 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X? Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 20:20:49 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <12278359.1638.1335669649223.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynei5> References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5> <13849842.838.1335485882969.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbai3> <134641.307.1335542673651.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbrx5> <2867357.127.1335561067669.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynee1> NNTP-Posting-Host: 96.2.54.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1335672245 27612 127.0.0.1 (29 Apr 2012 04:04:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 04:04:05 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <2867357.127.1335561067669.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynee1> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=96.2.54.122; posting-account=lJ3JNwoAAAAQfH3VV9vttJLkThaxtTfC User-Agent: G2/1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2012-04-28T20:20:49-07:00 List-Id: On Friday, April 27, 2012 4:11:07 PM UTC-5, sbelm...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, April 27, 2012 12:04:33 PM UTC-4, Shark8 wrote: > >=20 > > I thought stubs were an accepted software engineering/design practice..= . >=20 > procedure Shut_Down_Reactor (Reactor : Reactor_Type) is null; >=20 > The phrase "where the default behavior is null" is a contridiction in ter= ms; calling a subprogram to achieve the effect of not calling a subprogram = is simply bananas. This is plainly false. Consider a cleanup/freeing procedure in a component-= based RAD style program* when it is applied to a form having both component= s and [sub-]forms which contain both components and forms themselves.=20 Having the base COMPONENT with a null procedure for its free is absolutely = reasonable, especially if the inherited classes need not do anything specia= l to ensure they are properly disposed of. The form and all of its componen= t-containing children, however, must do something else: pass the free comma= nd to those children. * I'm assuming a class hierarchy with a base COMPONENT type and two branche= s: the first a CONTAINER class which can hold other components (like visual= controls); and one, say ITEM, which is for components which cannot have co= mponents added (like a timer). {Yes, this could be done differently, perhap= s with an abstract base-class, but then you have the problem that there is = no default at all and each actual object of COMPONENT would have to declare= its own personal free-procedure....}