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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,73cb216d191f0fef
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.180.86.34 with SMTP id m2mr320311wiz.5.1363339928470;
        Fri, 15 Mar 2013 02:32:08 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 g1ni67067wig.0!nntp.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is this expected behavior or not
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:33:38 +0100
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <14xhnqpbsbb2n$.6qp6jzl886e5$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <c988e09f-8532-4840-9749-b61aa39551b4@googlegroups.com>
 <mtz6eyrgv524.r2yf3jw9vid3$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wccmwu8r0xh.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <8klywqh2pf$.1f949flc1xeia.dlg@40tude.net>
 <513f6e2f$0$6572$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <b3jec1s37hwu$.bg5cvsul0r5$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <513faaf7$0$6626$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <aufd7vornmrk.2dxqrc3egrtg$.dlg@40tude.net> <khphpb$5f1$1@dont-email.me>
 <w46epyd1vjc2.1e1bviaog2kwi$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <51408e81$0$6577$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <1xqmd3386hvns.1og1uql2cgnuf$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <5140b812$0$6575$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <vxjicagtvzjg.1bcu3fzy711ux$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <5140f1ad$0$6634$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <7jct0noryc1v.1rnj5kkzx6m35.dlg@40tude.net>
 <5141c499$0$6642$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <18r2kop6fyozu.tctrjnghfxqs.dlg@40tude.net> <khstap$f55$1@dont-email.me>
 <1wv3p3nrtejfk$.bwebhg9agt0l.dlg@40tude.net>
 <51421404$0$6576$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: FbOMkhMtVLVmu7IwBnt1tw.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2013-03-15T10:33:38+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 19:16:35 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> On 14.03.13 18:29, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>> > And please, we are talking about Ada here, not KOVOA (Kasakov's Own View
>>> > of Ada).
>> Yes, it is my view of Ada. You have yours. What is wrong with that?
> 
> An analogy:
[...]

You are confusing program with the language of. You can write a program in
OOA/D-way in any language, Assembler included. That does not make those
languages OOPL.

OOA/D /= OOPL

OOPL supports certain kinds of ADT's at the language level. There is no
agreed definition but usually support of dynamic polymorphism (=sets of
ADT's and ADT representing these sets) is considered necessary for a
language to be considered OO.

Ada 95+ is an OOPL according to this definition, because Ada directly
supports sets of types (Ada's class) and has types representing instances
from set members (class-wide types).

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de