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 10.182.119.164 with SMTP id kv4mr42760798obb.9.1448562472033;
        Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:27:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.182.87.132 with SMTP id ay4mr521483obb.14.1448562472009;
 Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:27:52 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!news.glorb.com!mv3no3364737igc.0!news-out.google.com!f6ni13970igq.0!nntp.google.com!mv3no4450047igc.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:27:51 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <n377k1$36j$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=94.107.233.114;
 posting-account=6m7axgkAAADBKh082FfZLdYsJ24CXYi5
NNTP-Posting-Host: 94.107.233.114
References: <b4aee46c-7dbb-4906-99c5-f4f8e9876fc6@googlegroups.com>
 <n2viun$sb0$1@dont-email.me>
 <04eb6626-644b-4b16-a329-c35659a9fbe2@googlegroups.com>
 <n325f8$kq0$1@dont-email.me> <dbjve4F188rU1@mid.individual.net>
 <n32lqq$sqm$1@dont-email.me> <1ephv5ugr5mib$.9ehadf3dddct$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <c3827fcd-6b2e-4c64-8901-1e91030f1c84@googlegroups.com>
 <1nf8wc05tjtvf$.1ctjb9hsr0qsp.dlg@40tude.net>
 <8132c558-aec2-41f4-8024-4a75a2d497ae@googlegroups.com>
 <17c8a7kqoxvff.aa1raqev6xlu$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <75a4c7be-391d-4e5d-9e6e-23607132c943@googlegroups.com>
 <n377k1$36j$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <343b78d1-c1ba-40d3-af80-e18de45f2e3d@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: operation can be dispatching in only one type
From: Serge Robyns <serge.robyns@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 18:27:52 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:28550
Date: 2015-11-26T10:27:51-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thursday, 26 November 2015 16:16:34 UTC+1, J-P. Rosen  wrote:
unction ".X" (Left : T) return Integer);
> >> > =20
> >> > P.S. Surely, at some point there would a kludge invented with aspect=
s as it
> >> > was done for array indexing...
> > Got you.  Yes that would be nice but my need is current :-(
> > I agree that this would be a marvelous enhancement.
>=20
> Nothing marvelous, just saving keystrokes. You can always make a private
> type and explicit subprograms to access "virtual" components.
>=20

Isn't the purpose of higher programming languages not to save keystrokes, s=
implifying abstractions, enabling more powerful algorithms to be expressed =
directly?  My first language was assembly language.  I've been programming =
100K's of code and could literally do whatever I wanted, even change the OS=
 behavior through hooking into or jumping at very specific places inside th=
e OS ROM.  I felt very mighty, my code was actually very readable and I was=
 a very fast programmer on top of that.  But it took always more effort to =
build or call a callable subroutine than just using high level programming =
language, I had to take care of building a stack, fill the right values int=
o the right registers, recover return values, etc. where as otherwise I cou=
ld just write I :=3D Integer'Value(S);

True, assembly isn't portable but if this is the only purpose then we would=
 have stick to "simple" languages such BCPL for example.  C would never hav=
e appeared, Ada would not have been invented nor Smalltalk and the list is =
almost endless.