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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,9983e856ed268154
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.205.126.4 with SMTP id gu4mr83752bkc.8.1345709319692;
        Thu, 23 Aug 2012 01:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.181.11.234 with SMTP id el10mr146096wid.2.1345709319224;
        Thu, 23 Aug 2012 01:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 m12ni126129bkm.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!7no38350348wig.0!news-out.google.com!q11ni272120193wiw.1!nntp.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!uucp.gnuu.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:08:25 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Should Inline be private in the private part of a package spec?
References: <50353a25$0$6581$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <1x29v2l5crksa$.17qggd3ghy94c$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <746632025367360149.847942rm-host.bauhaus-maps.arcor.de@news.arcor.de>
 <19yh6raqplxd9$.ubx1vlm6le9i.dlg@40tude.net>
In-Reply-To: <19yh6raqplxd9$.ubx1vlm6le9i.dlg@40tude.net>
Message-ID: <5035e4f9$0$6572$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Aug 2012 10:08:25 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5c7ec842.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=Z6PY39`7`lB2:OR3:3gaE@McF=Q^Z^V3H4Fo<]lROoRA8kF<OcfhCOKOf:2gZO=N1OPCY\c7>ejVH]6BU]5=I;nG\Y8VA=ZVZfH
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-08-23T10:08:25+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 23.08.12 09:06, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2012 20:29:13 GMT, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>
>> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 21:59:36 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 22.08.12 19:44, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>>>> I need to write many parsers if I can't use XML. I use data not
>>>>>>> generated by our programs.
>>>>> In that case this is irrelevant to the issue. Other programs use formats
>>>>> they do. If that requires parsing that is their problem.
>>>>
>>>> Next time I download a PDF from A Big Bank or from a corporation,
>>>> destined to be a PDF document, I'll tell them that it is their
>>>> problem if I need to parse it.
>>>
>>> Do you know a way to process PDF documents without parsing them? Then, do
>>> it!
>>
>> How is my parsing their problem?
>
> Who cares?
>
> You said that XML is necessary because PDF requires parsing as well as XML
> does. By this logic pigs can fly.

I said that since there are multiple different source (Excel, PDF, ...)
I need *more* parsing. If all sources use XML, the variety of parsers is
reduced. (For more, see the next sentence.)

>> If they did use XML then my life would be easier.
>
> If they didn't it would be much easier.

No, as Pascal Obry has expounded two days ago, in the real, non-standard
world that some of us live in, we would not even enjoy the luxury of a
known file format such as Excel or PDF.