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: 103376,38fc011071df5a27
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-29 02:15:22 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.uchicago.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!newsfeed.mathworks.com.MISMATCH!newsfeed!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dialin-145-254-039-049.arcor-ip.NET!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ideas for Ada 200X
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 11:17:46 +0200
Organization: At home
Message-ID: <bb4j37$5juvr$7@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
References: <6a90b886.0305262344.1d558079@posting.google.com>
 <VjOAa.16051$8g5.257873@news2.e.nsc.no> <3ED41344.7090105@spam.com>
 <3ED46D81.FF62C34F@0.0> <3ED46E07.4340CABC@0.0>
 <3ED4F3FD.A0EF7079@alfred-hilscher.de> <3ED4ECFC.5060000@cogeco.ca>
 <wccznl70y64.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-039-049.arcor-ip.net (145.254.39.49)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1054199720 5897211 145.254.39.49 (16 [77047])
User-Agent: KNode/0.7.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37981
Date: 2003-05-29T11:17:46+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Robert A Duff wrote:

> Note that an earlier version of Ada 9X allowed untagged class-wide
> types.  That feature, plus giving a true name to root_integer, would
> have allowed such things to be written *in the language*:
>
>     procedure Incr(X: in out Root_Integer'Class; By: Root_Integer'Class);
> 
>     Incr(A[I].X);
>     Incr(A[I].X, By => 2);
> 
> Of course, you can define such a procedure in Ada 95, but you have to do
> it for every integer type, and it's just not worth the trouble.  If you
> could do it once, for all integer types, it would be worth it.

So, let's make all types "tagged"! I think it could be done little or no 
compatibility impact.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
www.dmitry-kazakov.de