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,a84eaf8fb2470909 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!inka.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.belwue.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Subject: Re: Ada generics Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de Organization: cbb software GmbH References: <1166710494.869393.108730@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <17fe4xfogg7p5.1dcyc5nyc2gsl.dlg@40tude.net> <1166805696.291429.239590@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com> <186qujlcx6rwl.1h6eq4mbdaa5s$.dlg@40tude.net> <1167150212.165097.289010@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com> <1qmdvus6du3xu.1n21tzgev46ia$.dlg@40tude.net> <1167246396.057028.325080@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com> <15jxp8z1iu5fk.1oeihvavjghgg$.dlg@40tude.net> <1167327306.22163.66.camel@localhost> <1on3cinnnckc5.1rxxvjhxs5qzl.dlg@40tude.net> <1167421145.30532.11.camel@localhost> <1167490403.26940.44.camel@localhost> Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 14:00:18 +0100 Message-ID: <1a2r4wlgiett6.1w5j3q7696x72$.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Date: 01 Jan 2007 14:00:17 CET NNTP-Posting-Host: d1c5fd6b.newsspool4.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=_CK8k3ORe0AI7\_^6>c20J4IUK On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 15:53:24 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote: > On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 10:58 +0100, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > >>>> Corollary: never ever make a formal language (Ada) dependent on a natural >>>> one (German). That would make the former natural. >>> >>> I don't see how identifier rules are natural (not formal), whatever >>> the natural language is that guides the choice of names in a >>> particular program. >> >> Because these rules are subject of endless chaotic political changes. > > I don't know about ISO or ARG political changes--besides > the rather interesting glimpses at language debates during > Ada 9X in the archives, if you want to call this politics. I didn't mean ISO, I did real politic, "Rechtschreibreform" etc. > Should the characters '1' and 'l' be removed from the > Ada standard characters because that's a similar chaos? This is an issue of a proper font selection. These glyphs need not to be same. > Should there be a ruling about Finalisation versus > Finalization? No, and for exactly same reason why there should also be no ruling that ss = �. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de