Re: Why constant components are not permitted ?

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 10:57:25 +0100, Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57) wrote:

> Le Fri, 25 Nov 2011 10:12:54 +0100, Dmitry A. Kazakov  
> <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> a �crit:
> 
>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 10:14:34 -0800 (PST), David Sauvage wrote:
>>
>>> In my case I find it useful to declare my Object Tag component as a
>>> constant, but it is not permitted, I would be interested to learn
>>> why ?
>>
>> Language irregularity. There are other things which work for components
>> differently, e.g. no anonymous arrays.
> You could argue it's an irregularity, if this was useful to anything.

No, irregularity is independent on usability. abs might look totally
useless for modular types, yet its presence makes the language more
regular. [abs is not useless in the context generic programming is
considered]
  
> Another one could argue Ada did not blindly apply any schema to anything.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions...

The rule of good language design is: do not introduce irregularities and
constraints unless absolutely necessary.

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