Re: Properties

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Shark8" <onewingedshark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:3b84c8e7-1a51-4a7c-9646-119f1fc51478@s4g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>I would like to submit a proposal for future Ada development; namely
> "Properties." The purpose of this thread is to: 1) present the ideas
> in general; 2) bounce ideas for the syntax off of fellow Ada users; 3)
> work on presenting ideas to others; and  4) obtain the information to
> submit the proposal.

My initial reaction is that you have a solution in search of a problem. That 
always happens when someone presents their whiz-bang new feature first 
instead of explaining in detail what the problem with current Ada is. (Don't 
worry, it's happened to all of us at some point or another.)

So, if you want this to be taken seriously, you need to explain the problem 
in detail and then show how your proposal fixes/improves the problem.

Note that the ARG in general is looking for problems that are occurring in 
real code, and much less for solutions to those problems -- we're plenty 
creative in that regard! We've occassionally talked about the need to have 
more flexibility for components (the missing "constant" components come up 
once in a while), but I think it would be helpful to have more compelling 
examples of problems with the current facilities.

                                             Randy.