Re: Ada 2005?

[Martin Dowie <martin.dowie@btopenworld.com>]

conradwt@runbox.com wrote:
> Hi Martin, I'm not hung up on a 'class' keyword but this would make it
> clear as to what one is trying to do in the converting steps from C++
> to Ada.

I think there was plenty of debate about creating a new reserved word 
'class' in the Ada9X development but 'tagged' won. I'm sure the 
rationale is probably still kicking around on the net somewhere...


> Also, this was an example from one of the Ada resources and
> you'll find it at the following address:
> 
> http://www.adahome.com/Ammo/Cplpl2Ada.html

> Thus, you're saying that I could have declared the functions as
> followed:
> 
> function Name return String;
> function Major return Integer;
> function Minor return Integer;

Nearly but there is no implicit 'this' parameter as there is in C++, so 
will still need to name it (and its type).


> Then, you're saying that I can use it as follows:
> 
> aDevice : Device_Type := Devices.Create( "Test", 1, 1 );

aDevice : Device := ...;


> Put_Line( aDevice.Name );
> Put_Line( aDevice.Major );
> Put_Line( aDevice.Minor );

In Ada200Y, yes.

Cheers

-- Martin