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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.224.42.141 with SMTP id s13mr6170510qae.3.1367968242995; Tue, 07 May 2013 16:10:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.109.228 with SMTP id hv4mr754032igb.2.1367968242833; Tue, 07 May 2013 16:10:42 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx05.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!m7no3357595qam.0!news-out.google.com!y6ni19295qax.0!nntp.google.com!m7no3357590qam.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 16:10:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 References: <17ceq51ydy3s0.s94miqqzbg5w.dlg@40tude.net> <1vrhb7oc4qbob$.q02vuouyovp5$.dlg@40tude.net> <19lrzzbgm77v6.1dzpgqckptaj6.dlg@40tude.net> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Seeking for papers about tagged types vs access to subprograms From: Adam Beneschan Injection-Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 23:10:42 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:15418 Date: 2013-05-07T16:10:42-07:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 3:32:03 PM UTC-7, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Tue, 7 May 2013 15:35:01 -0500, "Jacob Sparre Andersen news" > > Randy declaimed the following in comp.lang.ada: > > > OTOH, that doesn't mean that a complete overhaul of Ada (but keeping most of > > its core principles intact) wouldn't be a good idea. The main thing is that > > the result most certainly would not be Ada, but rather would be a new > > language *inspired by* Ada. (That might even be a good thing, as it would > > allow Ada-haters to take an unbiased look without realizing Ada was > > involved.) If such a language had clear advantages over Ada 2012 (and few or > > no clear disadvanatges), it would be likely that many Ada users would make > > the switch. > > What would you call it? AdaPT (Ada-Prime Transform ) We could follow the "increment operator" pattern adopted by C++, and call it something like Language'Succ(Ada) or maybe Ada'Succ for short. Then again, that might not be the best name to induce Ada-haters to take another look at it.... -- Adam