Re: Full view of a private partial view cannot be a subtype

[Jere <jhb.chat@gmail.com>]

On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 1:40:40 PM UTC-5, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote:
> 
> But your argument is about ease of writing, with isn't going to convince anyone 
> who likes Ada. Ada explicitly states in the ARM Introduction that it's for code 
> that's easy to read, not easy to write. The fact that you type more with 
> composition is not an argument against it.
No, I wasn't making an argument vs ease of writing.  I was saying that, 
for me, there are cases where composition is harder to read. 

> 
> > I respect yall's view on this, but in either case it is still a subjective
> > matter.  There are a variety of people out there who all view things very
> > differently.
> 
> I disagree. There are a set of S/W-engineering principles that help guide the 
> S/W engineer to create S/W that is simple, correct, and easy to read. Every 
> real-world use of type extension that I've seen has violated the principle of 
> locality--that's inherent in the nature of type extension. Thus it is 
> objectively more complex and harder to read than S/W that violates none of the 
> principles.
> 
I don't think we will ever agree on this topic, because, having grown up as 
someone with trouble reading, I had to find alternate methods to parse 
through what I saw.  It's easy to get overwhelmed when there is so much
to read/go through.  What's readable to you isn't necessarily readable to me.

Hopefully we can just agree to disagree.