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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,c890e6ab3fb2c5fc,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c890e6ab3fb2c5fc,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-01-17 09:57:06 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++
Path: nntp.gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!chsun!mlma11.matrix.ch!user
From: Mats.Weber@matrix.ch (Mats Weber)
Subject: Re: ADA Objects Help!
Message-ID: <Mats.Weber-1701951857060001@mlma11.matrix.ch>
Sender: usenet@eunet.ch
Organization: ELCA Matrix SA
References: <3f9g1u$j4m@nps.navy.mil> <D2H5un.FEr@nntpa.cb.att.com>
 <3fcs59$70s@nps.navy.mil> <3ff186$c19@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 17:57:06 GMT
Xref: nntp.gmd.de comp.lang.ada:18170 comp.lang.c++:87484
Date: 1995-01-17T17:57:06+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3ff186$c19@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>, dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote:

> I can't get excited about the difference between
> 
>   a.b(c);
> 
> and
> 
>   b (a, c);
> 
> I actually much prefer the second, because why introduce a new syntax when
> none is needed, and type extension and dynamic dispatching are MUCH more
> general concepts than a narrow view of objects and methods would suggest.

It is not a new notation: it exists for tasks and you can write a.b(c)
when a is a task object. As there are tasks and task types, why not
packages and package types ?