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-Thread: 103376,c08a7609345f4e5
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!x42g2000yqx.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Limited use for limited with?
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 00:33:33 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <586bdb21-1105-4fd2-bcb7-116be8c92517@x42g2000yqx.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <853314bc-0f79-435f-86a5-d7bcdd610731@c10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
 <f7b952cc-bc96-4e4c-ae72-ba08ca1e3445@i13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
 <82y6ajg07m.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.98.68.197
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1285832013 534 127.0.0.1 (30 Sep 2010 07:33:33
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 07:33:33 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: x42g2000yqx.googlegroups.com; posting-host=153.98.68.197;
 posting-account=pcLQNgkAAAD9TrXkhkIgiY6-MDtJjIlC
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.6)
 Gecko/20100625 Firefox/3.6.6 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14325
Date: 2010-09-30T00:33:33-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Stephen Leake wrote on comp.lang.ada:
> Ludovic Brenta <ludo...@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:
>> I generally think twice or three times before declaring an access type
>> in the same package as the object type. In fact, I think twice before
>> declaring any access type at all :) To me, an access type makes the
>> package unclean.
>>
>> Since, in Ada, all objects of tagged types are passed by reference and
>> since Ada has class-wide types, you do not need any access type to
>> achieve pass-by-reference semantics or dynamic dispatching. This
>> leaves dynamic memory allocation as the only remaining justification
>> for access types.
>
> You left out accessibility checks, which are an important reason for
> named access types.

Yes, that's why I generally prefer named access types over anonymous
access types, but you don't use access values just because of
accessibility checks, do you?

--
Ludovic Brenta.