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: a07f3367d7,657568723e59e45b
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Received: by 10.181.12.101 with SMTP id ep5mr1345227wid.1.1351391175433;
        Sat, 27 Oct 2012 19:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 q13ni70622wii.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.141.40.65.MISMATCH!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!border2.nntp.ams2.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams2.giganews.com!border3.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.panservice.it!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Basic issue with dotted notation and tagged types
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:02:16 +0200
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <1iwm9zh3ctl5y$.197u4rcmyrxyh$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <op.wmjwl6mdule2fv@cardamome> <k62tl7$cro$1@dont-email.me>
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="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-10-22T10:02:16+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:46:49 +0200, J-P. Rosen wrote:

> Le 22/10/2012 00:55, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) a écrit :
>> [Snip]
>> Will this display `A` or `B`? Actually, the program compiled with GNAT
>> 4.6, displays `A`. It displays the same even when the two commented
>> lines are commented‑out and thus the function `F` is declared before the
>> field `F`. I can't remember if the RM have special wordings about it,
>> but I feel this does not honour the principle of least surprise. May be
>> this should be disallowed, to access any one of the two, when both are
>> together visible from a scope?
>> 
> RM2005 4.1.3 (9.2/2): "The designator of the subprogram shall not be the
> same as that of a component of the tagged type visible at the point of
> the selected_component."
> 
> BTW, this corresponds to /my/ view of least surprise: a prefixed view is
> merely a writing simplification, and you are always free not to use it
> without losing any functionality. OTOH, you would have no other way to
> access a subcomponent. Therefore, it makes sense that the subcomponent
> is "stronger".

>From a wider (and simpler) point of view a record component is just a pair
of primitive operations (getter/setter) on the record type. That makes them
conflicting with any user-defined primitive operations of same signature.

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