Re: Unchecked_Conversion

[rlove@antispam.neosoft.com (Robert B. Love )]

In <LdLT6.2225$bA3.107918@www.newsranger.com> Ted Dennison wrote:
> In article <9fnbtt$ild$1@e3k.asi.ansaldo.it>, Lele says...
> >I should convert data types and record data types from one type to 
another,
> 
> Just to back up Marc here, you should almost *never* have to convert 
types. The
> only times I ever have to do it are when interfacing with external 
routines that

My experience runs counter to this.  My employer has chosen to use
typing for every conceivable measurement. So we have type Meters, 
Meters_Per_Second, Feet, Feet_Per_Second, Seconds, Watts, Volts, and so 
on.
The list is endless.

To avoid conversions I would have to have hundreds of overloaded 
operators.
And to make matters worse, we have generic vectors that can be 
instantiated
for the basic types above.  I would have to have overloaded operators for
all the vector combinations.

No, using Ada in my problem domain, you are constantly converting types.
And it can be a pain.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Bob Love                                   
 rlove@neosoft.com                            
----------------------------------------------------------------