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,c1400b61b3f80c1e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Adam Beneschan Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Are there noticable differences in Ada acceptance by country? Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <713aa346-def1-4d02-8650-d0a652c6584d@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com> References: <87d4pr6413.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <47e0fc15$0$89167$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk> <13u2t1a2s141531@corp.supernews.com> <1fac7b25-a11f-4199-97ad-45688318e424@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1kv438li1fcvq.ox99qnglkog5.dlg@40tude.net> <9adb8bbd-5058-4406-b8b9-2ccfbc141264@u72g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <9ada5b92-bce2-44ca-9e1e-8f5fc773cd23@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1206133895 11731 127.0.0.1 (21 Mar 2008 21:11:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:11:35 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.7.12-1.3.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20540 Date: 2008-03-21T14:11:34-07:00 List-Id: On Mar 21, 12:21 pm, gp...@axonx.com wrote: > On Mar 21, 12:39 pm, Simon Wright wrote: > > > gp...@axonx.com writes: > > > From my own C experience: using code from different sources X and Y > > > coordinates in function calls were in different order: foo(x,y); > > > boo(height, width), etc. Easy to overlook. > > > That was my point (I expect I failed to make it properly): if you use > > a record for Coordinate, your chance of getting the components the > > wrong way round is hugely reduced, and I don't think the added value > > of making the H & V components different _types_ is worth the added > > cost. > > Is there any runtime cost of using new type if no range is defined? Very unlikely, I think. I think the type of "cost" Simon was talking about was the added burden (on both writer and reader) of additional type conversions cluttering up the code, when (in this case) they probably accomplish very little in the way of preventing programmer errors. -- Adam