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: a07f3367d7,66f9ac28e8d63f60 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!club-internet.fr!feedme-small.clubint.net!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Enforcing initialization protocol for protected type Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:24:57 -0500 Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Message-ID: References: <1fcccc80-0142-4f07-8852-8d151ea96ee2@c37g2000yqi.googlegroups.com> <4aa53c59$0$30237$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <73fb1051-edf9-43f8-be50-5a2faa866040@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com> <7z37lspxbvu5.xk9ag8zcslry$.dlg@40tude.net> <61284459-5a02-410a-8ffc-76ad4256f138@a7g2000yqo.googlegroups.com> <1rusjydws2ko.rpfwzoyv4bzj$.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1252707976 29291 69.95.181.76 (11 Sep 2009 22:26:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 22:26:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8296 Date: 2009-09-11T17:24:57-05:00 List-Id: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote in message news:1rusjydws2ko.rpfwzoyv4bzj$.dlg@40tude.net... ... > P.S. It looks like a language design bug. If allowed then at least it > should have been like: > > Obj: subtype Rec (new Disc); > -- An anonymous subtype is declared for Obj I think most of us consider "coextensions" a language design bug. Indeed, that is about the nicest thing I can say about them. There are many of us who think that allocators of anonymous access types should simply be illegal (in all contexts), because what they mean currently depends so heavily on context and that makes them a maintenance nightmare (at best). Morevoer, the rules for coextensions are a constantly shifting complex morrass. So, if you want to give yourself and your vendor a constant supply of headaches, then by all means use coextensions. Otherwise, I highly suggest you avoid them. (For the record, Janus/Ada does not support coextensions -- recent versions make the allocators illegal since they don't have the correct semantics. Implementation is currently scheduled for approximately the year 2092. ;-) Randy.