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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,9aa4352fa83d37dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-03 16:37:26 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!zeus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!green.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!news.glorb.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!a6202946!not-for-mail From: Jeffrey Carter Organization: jrcarter commercial-at acm [period | full stop] org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Main subprogram at library level References: <1047ia2f8afucd9@corp.supernews.com> <104a370t2sred07@corp.supernews.com> <7qa1c.16379$yZ1.8619@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> <104c8i34oc8uj59@corp.supernews.com> In-Reply-To: <104c8i34oc8uj59@corp.supernews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <9Tu1c.20164$aT1.7335@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:37:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.184.32.12 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net 1078360645 63.184.32.12 (Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:37:25 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:37:25 PST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6043 Date: 2004-03-04T00:37:25+00:00 List-Id: Randy Brukardt wrote: > Well, the AI proposed replacing this restriction by a bunch of others, > intended to prevent objects of a nested type from "leaking" out into an > outer scope (which is the real problem that has to be solved). The question > that hasn't been really answered is whether the proposed restrictions are > sufficient to solve the problem, and whether nested dispatching is really > implementable. I understand the problem. The AI sounds complicated, especially if no one is sure it's sufficient or even possible. My proposal is at least simple. That doesn't mean it would garner any support. -- Jeff Carter "You've got the brain of a four-year-old boy, and I bet he was glad to get rid of it." Horse Feathers 47