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-Thread: 103376,2843c5eea3415584
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: APQ
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 18:21:10 +0100
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <ckbl8fjiqh6f$.1p53u3tdj7sfj.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <sa4brcv2l5m.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au>
 <Onewd.204$Wt5.95202@read2.cgocable.net>
 <ydCdnUENQ8wivV_cRVn-sQ@megapath.net> <sa4d5x9si42.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au>
 <GTswd.248$Wt5.145533@read2.cgocable.net>
 <sa41xdpsfnt.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au> <cpu73t$9nr$1@kda-news.kongsberg.com>
 <sa4pt19qhg1.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au> <sa4acscr0vv.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au>
 <qmYwd.366$jT5.52@read1.cgocable.net>
 <1297625.Y25m4Ds50U@linux1.krischik.com>
 <1qdghglptbxd0.4agztqguu8nm.dlg@40tude.net>
 <2737240.Ctorkcd9f4@linux1.krischik.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net WPPYxDXxH7+meKTg1AKCIQjTj2Z9Ek0fFQqEore9HYSwQ1i1s=
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.12.1
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7170
Date: 2004-12-22T18:21:10+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:53:14 +0100, Martin Krischik wrote:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:07:44 +0100, Martin Krischik wrote:
>> 
>>> Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I can't imagine it making a practical difference here, but
>>>> perhaps I lack imagination on this point.
>>> 
>>>
> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Ada:Types:access#access_vs._access_all
>> 
>> Pool-specific access types do not do well:
>> 
>> 1. Upcast/downcast conversions do not work. You'll need
>> Unchecked_Conversion of pointers. It is nasty and dangerous.
>> 
>> 2. '[Unchecked_]Access does not work (otherwise, (1) would be a minor
>> problem).
>> 
>> 3. Rosen's trick does not work. Very bad. Move it to Initialize? That
>> won't work either, because of 2.
>> 
>> 4. Construction/destruction is headache. Wished to insert a newly created
>> object into a list? Not from Initialize! To delete it from there upon
>> destruction? Nay!
>> 
>> 5. Access discriminants cannot be pool-specific. Converting to general
>> access to specific one is again an Unchecked_Conversion of worst kind.
>> 
>> 6. There is no way to restrict objects allocations to a definite set of
>> pools. "type X (<>) is ..." does not count.
>> 
>> In general, I think that the issue should be thoroughly reworked.
> 
> Well, ist wiki. Klick on [edit] and make your point. It OK by me - actually
> it is he hole point of wiki: incremental impovement.

Of what? Is wiki =ARG or else [edit button] = AI? (:-))

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