Re: Negative float problem

[Maciej Sobczak <no.spam@no.spam.com>]

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:

>>So - why not having ADL in Ada? :)
> 
> C++ compiler matches things bottom up. This is not sufficient for Ada which
> represents a more general case. So ADL might be more problematic in Ada.

I don't really understand this.

> Further, parameterless function call is
> indistinguishable from name.

So? ADL is about *arguments* and does not apply to parameterless 
functions at all. It is there so that "things work as expected", which 
in particular applies to the original problem in this thread. There is 
an operator which does not work "as expected". ADL seems to be a solution.

> Personally, I'd prefer simpler visibility rules and more consistency checks
> preventing operation hiding, so than one could just "use" almost
> everything. Ada's advantage of having packages instead of wild insertions
> through #include, should be better used, IMO.

I don't understand this. Could you please elaborate?
(I'm learning Ada.)


-- 
Maciej Sobczak : http://www.msobczak.com/
Programming    : http://www.msobczak.com/prog/