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 2002:a6b:ac42:: with SMTP id v63-v6mr1121044ioe.103.1530043380575; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 13:03:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6218:: with SMTP id g24-v6mr154154otj.4.1530043380375; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 13:03:00 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder4.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!d7-v6no1076311itj.0!news-out.google.com!z3-v6ni758iti.0!nntp.google.com!d7-v6no1076307itj.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 13:03:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.195.62; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.195.62 References: <5e86db65-84b9-4b5b-9aea-427a658b5ae7@googlegroups.com> <776f3645-ed0c-4118-9b4d-21660e3bba4b@googlegroups.com> <87602fbu2g.fsf@nightsong.com> <87po0mziqt.fsf@nightsong.com> <87fu1izfgs.fsf@nightsong.com> <878t75nwad.fsf@adaheads.home> <15b6f89f-997b-45ac-86b4-2e614bb624c2@googlegroups.com> <28a46046-e7eb-4306-bc39-72bc751831ae@googlegroups.com> <400ba7f8-6875-4ba8-99ee-c105180d5d8b@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Ada Successor Language From: "Dan'l Miller" Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 20:03:00 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53345 Date: 2018-06-26T13:03:00-07:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 2:29:48 PM UTC-5, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > On 2018-06-26 20:47, Dan'l Miller wrote: > > On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 12:25:27 PM UTC-5, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote= : > >> On 2018-06-26 18:50, Dan'l Miller wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 10:38:50 AM UTC-5, Simon Wright wrote: > >>>> ric.wai88@gmail.com writes: > >>>> > >>>>> I hope I can opt to be out-side of this "Ada" community who seem be= nt > >>>>> on wasting copious time determining overly contrived ways of > >>>>> destroying Ada from the inside out.. Apparently because Ada's > >>>>> carefully enforced discipline is too inconvenient, or something. > >>>> > >>>> I agree with you. It feels as though we have a few people around who > >>>> enjoy wild flights of fancy. > >>> > >>> I agree. Ada does not need records with external-to-record tags. > >> > >> Ada already has them, since 1983. > >=20 > > Wait. Ada83 already has what you are proposing regarding 'Class for un= tagged records, eh? >=20 > Ada 83 has "untagged" records, yes. But Ada83 does not have your 'Class for untagged types. > > But merely 3 hours ago you said that your proposing of something that i= s already there would be pointless: >=20 > Exactly. I never proposed "untagged" records. I proposed a method to=20 > have a class-wide type rooted in a non-tagged type, not only records but= =20 > scalar types, array types, even tasks and protected objects as well. Ahhh, now your words have finally circled back to that bad idea that threat= ens to bring C++ slicing to Ada when the compiler's choice of strong type d= iffered from the programmer's intended strong type. Welcome back! Many ha= ppy returns. > >>> (What the heck would we call these, btw? Untagged tagged records? T= agged untagged records?) > >> > >> There is no special name in RM 3.8, just "record". > >=20 > > Ummmm. _LRM_'s =C2=A73.8 says nothing about your 'Class usage on untag= ged records. >=20 > It says about records, all records including "untagged" ones. But not your 'Class for untagged records using your external-to-record tag.