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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8d472879e3f609e0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-07 22:45:49 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!nntp-relay.ihug.net!usenet.net.nz!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!news.xtra.co.nz!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "AG" <ang@xtra.co.nz>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <mailman.8.1054540581.12990.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <slrnbdm1i7.1k5.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <bbf9kl$7kt$1@ns.felk.cvut.cz> <ZXTCa.1089424$F1.129227@sccrnsc04>
 <0vGdnQFmVPoZj0Gj4p2dnA@gbronline.com>
 <gNUCa.41201$fT5.2098@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <slrnbdp2bt.1lk.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <1054647054.761122@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <slrnbdpc43.87p.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <1054651042.211055@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <slrnbdpdfj.87p.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <1054652619.86785@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Subject: Re: Case sensitivity (was Re: no title)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Message-ID: <h4AEa.15891$JA5.306769@news.xtra.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 17:46:40 +1200
NNTP-Posting-Host: 219.88.62.202
X-Complaints-To: newsadmin@xtra.co.nz
X-Trace: news.xtra.co.nz 1055051149 219.88.62.202 (Sun,
 08 Jun 2003 17:45:49 NZST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 17:45:49 NZST
Organization: Xtra
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38819
Date: 2003-06-08T17:46:40+12:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1054652619.86785@master.nyc.kbcfp.com...
> Preben Randhol wrote:
> > And my point is that this is a bad idea(tm)
>
> And *my* point is that while it may be a bad idea,
> Ada already allows it in the case of function
> overloading, including enumerators.
>
No, it does no such thing. The important difference
is that in overloading you (or compiler/language)
use context info to determine which overloaded
function was meant. What you seem to maintain
is that character cases of identifiers should matter
reagardless of context. In effect, they do determine
what the identifier is never mind the context. It may
be good, neutral or bad thing (IMHO it's very bad)
but it's certainly different from overloading issues.

For example, I presume you would allow things
like:

type x is (A, a);
type z is array(A..a) of ...