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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1592759aa83d0d45
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-28 06:57:15 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: maa@liacc.up.pt (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=E1rio_Amado_Alves?=)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: MI in Ada 200X (was: Suggestion for Ada 200x - Interface inheritance)
Date: 28 May 2003 06:57:14 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <4a4de33a.0305280557.5d5aba37@posting.google.com>
References: <0Pxza.699607$OV.652508@rwcrnsc54>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.137.36.167
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1054130235 12205 127.0.0.1 (28 May 2003 13:57:15
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 May 2003 13:57:15 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37908
Date: 2003-05-28T13:57:15+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Steve" <nospam_steved94@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<0Pxza.699607$OV.652508@rwcrnsc54>
> . . .
>   type sorted_data is new data_value, interface_example with
>     record
>       is_valid : Boolean;
>     end record;
> . . .

This is simply multiple inheritance (MI) in the Ada class system.
Calling it "interface" just confuses the issue. (I can do interfaces
with generics, formal packages, access-to-subprogram types, etc.)

Everybody wants class MI. The reasons it was left out of Ada 95 and
83, the cons, are weaker than the pros. So every Adaist whishes to see
it in Ada 200X.

Along with the nice syntaxes. Personally I prefer "and" to ",". And,
yes, ";" to "abstract tagged with null record". (Or is it "tagged
abstract null record"? Or "abstract tagged null record"? ;-)