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,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2078ce7aac45af5b
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.66.79.40 with SMTP id g8mr634886pax.45.1353011956281;
        Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:39:16 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 s9ni13672pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada202X : Adding functors
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 21:39:08 +0100
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <i6ad29i8wspm.gejeys7jesg1$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <0114d327-9f9f-4ad2-9281-56331d11a90c@googlegroups.com>
 <e33b09e3-7840-42d0-886b-8cf1ec7bf9d3@googlegroups.com>
 <15w6caje3zsh$.t5nqtwoa77x5$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <NLWdnUlRH6U-kjjN4p2dnAA@giganews.com>
 <r00q8we9dpjp.1410izlwuflo3$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <50a5492c$0$9523$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: pSb85Ij4EqcuHDcWtw64BQ.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-11-15T21:39:08+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:57:35 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> On 15.11.12 18:04, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>> And I personally find functional decomposition bad.
> 
> But "anonymous" programming is very, very popular, always.

I don't think it is about anonymity. It is rather about implied contracts,
inference from given implementation, structural equivalence which makes
functional decomposition questionable.

It boils down to weak typing because a closure is not considered
implementation of some stated, well-thought, designed type property. It is
written ad hoc. I also don't like declarative recursion where imperative
iteration is evidently cleaner. If you want to do something to each element
of container, the language should provide a way to write a plain loop
rather than a closure kludges.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de