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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-22 22:14:13 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.gbronline.com!news.gbronline.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:14:11 -0500
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:14:25 -0500
From: Wesley Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com>
Reply-To: wesgroleau@despammed.com
Organization: Ain't no organization here!
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US;
 rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, es-mx, pt-br, fr-ca
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died (was): 64 bit
  addressing and OOP
References: <mvul4v00ftbai2g6duuh0r38jpii2qvpjl@4ax.com>
 <a3eaa964.0302141953.16f72dfe@posting.google.com>
 <3E4E8F8C.9C096985@adaworks.com>
 <9fa75d42.0302250710.5549baaf@posting.google.com>
 <3E5C7033.BD5DC462@adaworks.com>
 <9fa75d42.0302260618.7506cba7@posting.google.com>
 <3E5CF5C6.84822F57@adaworks.com>
 <a3eaa964.0302261448.6f38de58@posting.google.com>
 <8qkczsAcGcn+Ew83@nildram.co.uk>
 <a3eaa964.0304162216.60978001@posting.google.com>
 <3EA04A1E.CAFC1FEF@adaworks.com>
 <9fa75d42.0304221126.7112b7d5@posting.google.com>
 <b84gku$2i5l$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <wccadeiglef.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
In-Reply-To: <wccadeiglef.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <ex-dnQPUe725vDujXTWcqw@gbronline.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.117.18.26
X-Trace: 
 sv3-Sz3mKBxPvk91dzvCKdykrOOZE9I1iRPaGLRQCKDHlItxrLRDlzRTogZuFcZtGTnt4zr8tSwHPOdU/Rv!H2clgYGBct5mqLmIvT3LRh5jQHcqQR/dx83CEecLBVHJkTm7gWZdpOb4Prig8FcMdeLl4AZJfazL!+2w8
X-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:36391
Date: 2003-04-23T00:14:25-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> Really!?  I think of array slicing as a pretty minor feature of Ada,
> which causes a lot of trouble for compiler writers, that could be
> dispensed with.  After all, you could write a function that grabs those
> components.

Having used it a lot, I really appreciated the fact
that the compiler writers went to that trouble.

Now I'm finishing up a Java class, and I am getting tired
of repeating that same trouble in nearly every program.

> I'm thinking particularly of slices as L-values.  Do you ever use that?

I did that a lot in Ada days, too.