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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c9a5d6b3975624e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-10-05 04:48:16 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsmi-us.news.garr.it!newsmi-eu.news.garr.it!NewsITBone-GARR!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dialin-145-254-041-028.arcor-ip.NET!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A.Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: OO in Ada Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 01:38:27 +0200 Message-ID: References: <3D9D02F3.9090600@worldnet.att.net> <1033752899.224298@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3D9E3018.8000403@worldnet.att.net> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-041-028.arcor-ip.net (145.254.41.28) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033817447 16443777 145.254.41.28 (16 [77047]) User-Agent: KNode/0.4 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29533 Date: 2002-10-06T01:38:27+02:00 List-Id: Jim Rogers wrote: > I disagree here. Ada does not give the illusion of multiple dispatch. Would "limited multiple dispatch" sound better? > An Ada subprogram can only be primitive to one type. That characteristic > is determined by the place in the source code where the subprogram > interface is defined. This is wrong. Technically you could do it, because type declaration areas [before freezing point] may overlap: type A is tagged ... type B is tagged ... procedure Multiple_Dispatch (X : A; Y : B); -- Alas, compilation error >I am not really happy with this design feature, but it is what it is. Of course limited multiple dispatch is better than nothing, like in C++. But both lead to surprises when one need to implement dyadic operations etc. -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de