From: Jeffrey Carter <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>
Subject: Re: Problem with limited with
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 17:17:21 -0700
Date: 2013-07-26T17:17:21-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ksv36l$tnc$1@dont-email.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cee34511-bfa7-49e1-a1b1-e7a01b42df58@googlegroups.com>
On 07/26/2013 03:17 PM, Adam Beneschan wrote:
>
> C'mon, people. It should be possible to ask a question about the language
> rules by posting a reduced case, without getting comments about why the
> poster didn't write his code a different way, or why the identifiers aren't
> descriptive, or why a complete working example wasn't posted or something.
It should be possible to post a reduced example that actually uses the feature
that causes the problem.
But even in that case, I'd still say the best solution is to avoid limited with.
Recursive types belong in the same pkg together. Limited with is a kludge to let
people write JavAda and should never have been added in the 1st place.
--
Jeff Carter
"What I wouldn't give for a large sock with horse manure in it."
Annie Hall
42
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-27 0:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-26 19:14 Problem with limited with Simon Wright
2013-07-26 20:49 ` Jeffrey Carter
2013-07-26 22:17 ` Adam Beneschan
2013-07-26 22:25 ` Shark8
2013-07-26 22:35 ` Simon Wright
2013-07-27 0:17 ` Jeffrey Carter [this message]
2013-07-27 1:08 ` Adam Beneschan
2013-07-27 8:05 ` Simon Wright
2013-07-27 2:32 ` Shark8
2013-07-27 5:42 ` Jeffrey Carter
2013-07-27 16:00 ` Shark8
2013-07-27 17:13 ` Jeffrey Carter
2013-07-27 19:21 ` Simon Wright
2013-07-28 2:51 ` Randy Brukardt
2013-07-27 3:55 ` Randy Brukardt
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox