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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,ab1d177a5a26577d
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!85.214.198.2.MISMATCH!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Chuck" <chuckmacdonald@nospam.me>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What's wrong with C++?
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:12:34 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <ijl2kk$jbv$1@news.eternal-september.org>
References: 
 <1ee1a434-4048-48f6-9f5e-d8126bebb808@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
 <b1f0b153-dc79-4b3c-a936-68723e76a4db@x1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <jbejuuszjy3y.vyllayr73kh0$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.vq2anayyule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <4d5d8a0b$0$6768$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Injection-Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 06:12:37 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx03.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="Nvo31E/p3EKlT4bDI5+9FA";
	logging-data="19839"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19/5GDJ4hX7v1xAJzblsN6t"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
Cancel-Lock: sha1:V6HKfbgLEJ/KU/cdLzSSzsrYmPg=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:18365
Date: 2011-02-18T00:12:34-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> On 2/17/11 8:19 PM, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote:
>> Le Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:02:58 +0100, Dmitry A. Kazakov
>> <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> a écrit:
>>> The flaw here is structural equivalence and, more generally, type
>>> inference. Not everybody agree that type inference is bad. I do
>>> believe that it is.
>>
>> I personally believe type inference (within a typed language), is
>> good when that is used to tersely write models of an application.
>> That is what (S)ML en derivatives do.
>
> Oddly enough, it is good practice to *not* play the inference
> game when creating "models" in ML languages:  when ML programmers
> describe a structure or type, they use type names explicitly.
> Every function is written in terms of its (typed) profile,
> not just the names.

I've seen a LOT of interjection of promotion of functional language 
concepts. I don't think it's going anywhere fast or ever (it's a niche 
just like logic languages, I Guess). Academia still pushing this? Do 
tell, how do you come to know ML and such? (email is fine as it is an 
off-topic tangent, but you have to request here to do that).