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-Thread: 103376,5bcc293dc5642650
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.30.202 with SMTP id u10mr21668843pbh.1.1319571347820;
        Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 p6ni1225pbn.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news-transit.tcx.org.uk!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why no Ada.Wide_Directories?
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 21:35:42 +0200
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <ci96gr5yzmpp$.1mwky141c6e78$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <9937871.172.1318575525468.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prib32>
 <418b8140-fafb-442f-b91c-e22cc47f8adb@y22g2000pri.googlegroups.com>
 <j7i6va$nso$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <7156122c-b63f-487e-ad1b-0edcc6694a7a@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
 <ffeeb5d0-5685-42ff-a141-72bea410f239@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
 <409c81ab-bd54-493b-beb4-a0cca99ec306@p27g2000prp.googlegroups.com>
 <d831c4d8-3540-44cb-8976-e588e22b4c59@l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
 <a3j4wzrhrj65$.bkkht9t97w84.dlg@40tude.net> <j7ng9f$6ob$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <amorj8tk8wlg.mekrgyi7rob0.dlg@40tude.net> <op.v3nc15beule2fv@index.ici>
 <1rlz5gwqmeizn$.fwqpl0mhzf54$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.v3nheddjule2fv@index.ici>
 <1w7i4ekc7yvjx$.60o908ry5lhc$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.v3nqg2eeule2fv@index.ici>
 <fkhjm8s2pblo$.3jkccwvy3uz7.dlg@40tude.net> <op.v3pcqxj8ule2fv@index.ici>
 <5279agttaub8.1pl7pt496l1am$.dlg@40tude.net> <j8729l$3g6$1@munin.nbi.dk>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: NkTZyZQzt+uRNthfI6+Hjg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:14189
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2011-10-25T21:35:42+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 14:22:27 -0500, Randy Brukardt wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message 
> news:5279agttaub8.1pl7pt496l1am$.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 14:53:11 +0200, Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57) wrote:
>>
>>> Le Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:35:21 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov
>>> <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> a �crit:
>>
>>>>> What's missing from Interface type introduced with Ada 2005 ?
>>>>
>>>> 1. Most Ada types do not have interfaces
>>> Eiffel has this, and this is 1) not perfect (may lead to performance
>>> issue) 2) rarely used in practice
>>
>> There is no performance loss.
> 
> Anytime you have a construct that allows multiple inheritance, there is a 
> large performance loss (whether or not you use the multiple inheritance). 
> You can move the performance loss from one construct to another (i.e. 
> dispatching calls, access types, etc.) but you can't get rid of it.

There is no time/memory loss, at all. For the types in question any legal
Ada 2005 program would generate exactly same code as it would be the
change.

The performance argument is bogus, because it considers programs, which are
presently impossible to write.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de