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: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-26 06:04:51 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsmi-us.news.garr.it!NewsITBone-GARR!news.mailgate.org!nntp.infostrada.it!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: chris User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030903 Thunderbird/0.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? References: <3F74366B.7050303@noplace.com> In-Reply-To: <3F74366B.7050303@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:09:43 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.98.236.164 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net 1064581490 81.98.236.164 (Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:04:50 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:04:50 BST Organization: ntl Cablemodem News Service Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42982 Date: 2003-09-26T14:09:43+01:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > > It seems that you get more than inheritance with tagged records and > packages. What did you want? (Is this the great "method->object vs > object->method debate? :-) You have all the features you need to support > full OO Programming from OO Design - just maybe not in the syntax you'd > be used to. Realistically, it wouldn't be possible to perform major > surgery on Ada's syntax to make it more like some languages that started > out as OO Concepts. There's too much history and need for upward > compatibility to go radically modifying the syntax in any serious way. > You've got to take the good with the bad - the capabilities are there, > but not necessarily as conveniently as you might like because of prior > history. But a solution does exist. Practically speaking we can't just > say "Ada would be better if only Ada were Eiffel..." - Trying to make > Ada look like some other language just won't work and will only annoy > existing users. "Protected" members, without using child packages.