Re: Why not combine Ada and C++?

["Martin Dowie" <martin.dowie@nospam.baesystems.com>]

"Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message
news:ZjHy7.30103$ev2.37026@www.newsranger.com...
> In article <9qfdbk$lae$1@wanadoo.fr>, Baugereau says...
> >
> >It may seems stupid, but I think such a language would benefit from C++
> >postfix notation.
> >Object.Method () insteand of Method (Object)
> >
> >Thus you can chain methods calls more clearly (1) and you can benefit
from a
> >better completion from your IDE (2).
> >1) Object.Method1().Method2() instead of Method2 (Method1 (Object))
> >2) Object.Meth* gives only methods that apply to Object whereas Meth*
> >doesn't have this information
>
> <sigh>
> Not only has this issue been discussed to death here multiple times
(answer?
> Like most things in Ada, it was done for a reason.), but it is in the
process of
> being rehashed yet again in another thread. Please go read it before
trying to
> dredge the issue up yet again.
>
> We now return you to your regularly-schdeduled flamewar, already in
progress.

I has understood this 'syntactic sugar' was going to be included in Ada0Y,
anyone
know anything about that?