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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,772ae8afc5db35f2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: nospam@thanks.com.au (Don Harrison) Subject: Re: Can't export object of private type Date: 1999/03/01 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 450145519 Sender: news@syd.csa.com.au X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dev7 References: <7b8cvc$ii5$3@plug.news.pipex.net> Organization: CSC Australia, Sydney Reply-To: nospam@thanks.com.au Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-03-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Nick Roberts wrote: :One needs to make a distinction between a design concept and the :implementational mechanism of that design concept, and not make the mistake :of thinking that a particular design is inextricably wedded to a particular :mechanism. .. I agree; there's a difference. There is always a semantic gap between design and implementation in a particular language. Better languages, IMO, are those where that gap is uniformly narrow. For Ada, I think the gap is quite wide in places (eg. polymorphic singletons) and narrow in others (eg. low-level mapping). -- Don (Harrison). donh at syd.csa.com.au