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=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DATE_IN_PAST_24_48
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,83568e4f0ce7998e
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.180.75.197 with SMTP id e5mr1681006wiw.1.1351478332131;
        Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 q13ni92136wii.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!81.171.88.15.MISMATCH!lightspeed.eweka.nl!82.197.223.103.MISMATCH!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!81.171.88.16.MISMATCH!eweka.nl!hq-usenetpeers.eweka.nl!border3.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border4.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Alternative syntax for function definitions?
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 10:38:06 +0100
Message-ID: <CCB16A0E.1FDA2%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
References: <op.wmtq0sipule2fv@cardamome>
 <aofcgnli1bud$.1ieeg4tvf6wt0.dlg@40tude.net> <op.wmtun2kuule2fv@cardamome>
 <en1cfkh3booj$.idqhb9xfwi97.dlg@40tude.net> <op.wmtx2nxkule2fv@cardamome>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: individual.net
 3IBtsMyWT5btrlMS7ChX8ASGPgGZ5SB8fJIapAN72zmqPtGdIAdGY3gv7CLo44xTMW
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7QfGaKLQN5PzTHTCeJ48mSUnGPM=
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.33.0.120411
Thread-Topic: Alternative syntax for function definitions?
Thread-Index: Ac20JsRgwrJm2bPQ1ESUxxegfbIXWQ==
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-10-27T10:38:06+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 27/10/2012 10:02, in article op.wmtx2nxkule2fv@cardamome, "Yannick
Duch�ne   (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote:

> Le Sat, 27 Oct 2012 10:37:11 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov
> <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> a �crit:
>> That is no problem. All types should have classes anyway. The dotted
>> notation itself is an implementation of some record interface.
> To talk about that point, I'm thinking of always using tagged types
> instead of legacy records, so as to be able to hide or expose the type
> definition without consequences on the client side, or even just change
> the layout. That's more resilient: if you have three properties A, B, C,
> where one is derived from the two other, say C is derived from A and B,
> and then decide later that instead C will be stored and B derived from A
> and C, you can do that without breaking client, if you use tagged records

How?

> (you can't with legacy record).

Why not?

-- 
Bill Findlay
with blueyonder.co.uk;
use  surname & forename;