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: 103376,29d8139471e3f53e
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Securing type extensions
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <87iq2bfenl.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
 <874odv9npv.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <87y6b7cedd.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
 <66a3704c-54f9-4f04-8860-aa12f516134b@t3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <87d3sib44t.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
 <134q4k2ly2pf4$.17nlv1q6q5ivo.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4c8dec8e$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <epkb3s8dfxk0$.1qdvo5vg2fsgh.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4c8e3f44$0$6769$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 17:29:53 +0200
Message-ID: <1ddvufp5kng6a.b03hb1xjzhtz$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Sep 2010 17:29:54 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 1e22d205.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=9\hCVo?kW?_f8j24CD<3lPic==]BZ:af^4Fo<]lROoRQ<`=YMgDjhgRRUbKm`amj0^[6LHn;2LCV^7enW;^6ZC`T\`mfM[68DCS7;K6To]bgJU
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14044
Date: 2010-09-13T17:29:54+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 17:12:04 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> On 13.09.10 11:42, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
>>> If a system must reflect trust and mistrust, shouldn't the
>>> mechanics of a language support both?
>> 
>> In Ada it is called visibility.
> 
> An event driven parser (or GUI) as an example: the gears of
> the parser (or event loop) interact with the prim ops of
> a user defined type.  The type will have been derived from
> some abstract type that I provided.
> 
> How will Ada's visibility rules help me trust the ops?

How making the abstract event type final would make it work in first place?

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