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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.36.7.204 with SMTP id f195mr3161927itf.37.1518209885479; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 12:58:05 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.157.95.135 with SMTP id g7mr188628oti.14.1518209885357; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 12:58:05 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!w142no27305ita.0!news-out.google.com!s63ni25itb.0!nntp.google.com!w142no27301ita.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 12:58:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=76.113.16.86; posting-account=lJ3JNwoAAAAQfH3VV9vttJLkThaxtTfC NNTP-Posting-Host: 76.113.16.86 References: <5d9134c9-a7d4-468e-8685-ebbb393eabea@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <1ca47a0e-e79c-4cc3-b411-1e9af9f44328@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: grassroots thoughts on access types From: Shark8 Injection-Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2018 20:58:05 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50348 Date: 2018-02-09T12:58:05-08:00 List-Id: On Friday, February 9, 2018 at 12:12:05 PM UTC-7, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote: > On 02/09/2018 06:19 PM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > > > > a. Dispatching operation. It cannot have a named access type. The conflicting > > design rule here is that *all* operations must be dispatching and any type must > > have a class. > > Anything that requires the use of anonymous access types is bad and should not be used. Streams & Generic_Dispatching_Constructor, unfortunately, both rely on access types. :(