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: 103376,89cb2d7ffc7421c9
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!130.59.10.21.MISMATCH!kanaga.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!cernne03.cern.ch!cern.ch!news
From: Maciej Sobczak <no.spam@no.spam.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ripple effect
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 09:03:04 +0200
Organization: CERN - European Laboratory for Particle Physics
Message-ID: <ecm7b8$cg4$1@sunnews.cern.ch>
References: <xF4Hg.924524$084.568220@attbi_s22> <ecjr2r$8vd$1@sunnews.cern.ch>
 <CMqHg.151544$1i1.36729@attbi_s72>
NNTP-Posting-Host: abpc10883.cern.ch
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: sunnews.cern.ch 1156489384 12804 (None) 137.138.37.241
X-Complaints-To: news@sunnews.cern.ch
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060801)
In-Reply-To: <CMqHg.151544$1i1.36729@attbi_s72>
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6372
Date: 2006-08-25T09:03:04+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Jeffrey R. Carter wrote:

>> Why?
>> If you remove some use clause that might affect the visibility of some 
>> primitive operation, then it will also remove the whole type that is 
>> involved in a given expression, rendering the whole as illegal.
>>
>> Could you provide a short example of this Ripple effect?
> 
> No. I'm simply aware that STT cites direct operator visibility as 
> potentially giving rise to the Ripple effect in the Ada FAQ
> 
> http://www.adapower.com/index.php?Command=Class&ClassID=FAQ&CID=358

Yes, I've seen it already. Still, something is missing.

As a C++ programmer, I like the idea of doing this:

std::cout << "Hello";

without writing using namespace std - the stream insertion operator will 
be found in the appropriate namespace (std in this case) and it's enough 
to qualify std::cout to make it happen. Without this feature, I would 
need to write this:

std::operator<<(std::cout, "Hello");


Now, adding or removing #include directives might change one legal C++ 
program into another legal program, but this is due to implicit 
conversions - without them I don't see any way for this to happen.

That's why the assertion that such effect is possible in Ada strikes me 
a little bit.
Waiting for examples.


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