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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.129.104.137 with SMTP id d131mr2328221ywc.12.1435064773381;
        Tue, 23 Jun 2015 06:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.140.86.105 with SMTP id o96mr493555qgd.11.1435064773365;
 Tue, 23 Jun 2015 06:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!au2pb.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!q107no2846483qgd.0!news-out.google.com!4ni2540qgh.1!nntp.google.com!z60no2844651qgd.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 06:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <d4629c07-4005-4bd3-8fa6-85d088fb83c9@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=185.30.133.97;
 posting-account=hya6vwoAAADTA0O27Aq3u6Su3lQKpSMz
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.30.133.97
References: <yo94phsbcvht$.1bktwe2qoqntt$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <mm58b5$9k0$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <4lrj5zz2u2z.u8x9cf7xzic6.dlg@40tude.net> <mm9h84$5n8$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <d4629c07-4005-4bd3-8fa6-85d088fb83c9@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <58f64fa9-7d0b-44dd-870c-77d9afcb82c4@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Ada design bug or GNAT bug?
From: vincent.diemunsch@gmail.com
Injection-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 13:06:13 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:26424
Date: 2015-06-23T06:06:13-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le lundi 22 juin 2015 20:27:17 UTC+2, Shark8 a =E9crit=A0:
>=20
> Yes, anonymous accesses ARE pretty bad.
> But this does bring up the question: what missteps have been made in Ada'=
s design?
>=20

I regard the refusal to create a "class type", like Ichbiah wanted it, just=
 like we have a protected type and a task type, as the root of evil. For th=
e OOP concept is based on an interface that is the same and instances that =
are different realizations of the same concept. So we need to have two obje=
cts :=20
- a class object that is an interface and manage memory (a descendant of co=
ntrolled type)
- an instance object that is polymorphic.

One may think that the distinction between class type and tagged type is su=
btle, but the implications of it are huge : without class object one needs =
as replacement access to a class wide type. This has led to the use of acce=
ss values everywhere when doing OOP. To ease the pain access parameters and=
 anonymous access types were introduced...

Regards,

Vincent