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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a84eaf8fb2470909
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!feeder.news-service.com!news2.euro.net!feeder1.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!news.netcologne.de!nhp.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Ada generics
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <1166710494.869393.108730@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
 <17fe4xfogg7p5.1dcyc5nyc2gsl.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1166805696.291429.239590@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com>
 <wvsqamnzgasf.gfemd82fzfpz$.dlg@40tude.net> <DFQjh.1222$oo4.1118@trndny09>
 <186qujlcx6rwl.1h6eq4mbdaa5s$.dlg@40tude.net> <q__jh.5046$6Z5.3245@trndny01>
 <awny47urt66k$.1vuw1blk1ccth$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1167150212.165097.289010@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>
 <1qmdvus6du3xu.1n21tzgev46ia$.dlg@40tude.net> <oekkh.5076$6f4.450@trndny08>
 <lbkjzskf2pv3$.b28bwviakyyb$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1167246396.057028.325080@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com>
 <15jxp8z1iu5fk.1oeihvavjghgg$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1167327306.22163.66.camel@localhost>
 <1on3cinnnckc5.1rxxvjhxs5qzl.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1167421145.30532.11.camel@localhost>
 <uatj6qmz9ewl.jtzbkhivhvfu$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1167490403.26940.44.camel@localhost>
 <1a2r4wlgiett6.1w5j3q7696x72$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1167732264.661.36.camel@localhost>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 12:11:53 +0100
Message-ID: <78t224mtd234.1e11h379pwu57.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 02 Jan 2007 12:11:50 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 396e7813.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=@Q;ZS_\1Rd_HigV@eW57PQ4IUK<Cl32<Q4Fo<]lROoRQ4nDHegD_]RUh@<HL1]mC6PDNcfSJ;bb[UIRnRBaCd<M^Td:F9kZmZnR`eKm6Ke0F>R
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8054
Date: 2007-01-02T12:11:50+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 11:04:24 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> On Mon, 2007-01-01 at 14:00 +0100, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
>>> Should there be a ruling about Finalisation versus
>>> Finalization?
>> 
>> No, and for exactly same reason why there should also be no ruling that ss
>> = �.
> 
> Should we deny problem domain facts just so that we have very
> simple rules for parsers? Where German is written, there is a
> simple rule: For writing "�" in upper case, use "SS".

This is not a domain of the programming language, but one of the natural
language. Somebody was too lazy to write 'sz' and invented a digraph '�'.
Others in other natural languages might come (and did) to even more crazy
ideas like "don't" = "do not". Why should that bother us?

> That's not too hard a challenge to computer science in my view,
> but I'll leave that to psychologists to answer when it comes
> to the views of actual computer scientists. :-)

Simplicity of implementation does not justify doing wrong things! (:-))

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de