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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,3ef3e78eacf6f938
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!news.stack.nl!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: Cesar Rabak <csrabak@yahoo.com.br>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Alternatives to C: ObjectPascal, Eiffel, Ada or Modula-3?
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 11:30:12 -0300
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <h44jdp$sas$1@aioe.org>
References: <h3sln0$rhm$2@news.eternal-september.org>
 <h41n4c$pm0$1@news.eternal-september.org> 	<h42da2$lcr$1@aioe.org>
 <b38dab3d-77a9-4979-9ef3-6d8198501b4f@w41g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <4A64C6FE.3040003@yahoo.com.br> <1q7swl7pyo55h$.1c0nqh26yfp8y.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: CypMocAmQgU7ZoH9HGMqRg.user.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.7.9
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 090513-0, 13/05/2009), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8d40rNP7tWytr6RfayKcoUA4iGI=
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.eiffel:367 comp.lang.ada:7239
Date: 2009-07-21T11:30:12-03:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov escreveu:
> On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:35:26 -0300, Cesar Rabak wrote:
> 
>> Hibou57 (Yannick Duchêne) escreveu:
>>> On 20 juil, 20:33, Cesar Rabak <csra...@yahoo.com.br> wrote:
>>>> Here you create two "subtypes" which are only nicknames for Float in
>>>> order to help the Ada compiler to discriminate the signature. BTW, why
>>>> the need of two subtypes for coordinates?
>>> Not “ subtype ” but “ type ”, which is not the same. Ada has both, and
>>> both are differents.
>> They are *considered* different in Ada technology, I respect that, but 
>> from a OO point of view, they are not: a new type would define a new set 
>> of operations on it.
> 
> It defines a new set of values, which automatically makes the operations
> different even if they are numerically equivalent or their low-level
> implementations are shared.

It defines a syntactic difference and as shown until now all the 
operations remain equal, even when the OO technique would suggest not: 
for example the new 'type' proposed for the angle measurement could make 
the wrapping automatically when operations made the results greater than 
2*pi.

> 
> You know, two bottles of beer are numerically equivalent to two worn socks.
> 

This is cardinality not equivalence, non sequitur for this discussion.