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: 103376,5c1125c290d9dd14
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!85.214.198.2.MISMATCH!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: ANN: Ada 2005 Math Extensions, 20100810 release
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 23:04:17 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <m28w4aw4ny.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <m2lj8eywqo.fsf@pushface.org> <m2bp98n82h.fsf@pushface.org>
	<xjlthhyt5ugw.w2yg0t26s4ak.dlg@40tude.net>
	<m239ujfwde.fsf@pushface.org>
	<15e1x67lls1pe$.sqnhbm59hwdz$.dlg@40tude.net>
	<m2d3tmwavk.fsf@pushface.org> <op.vhd7z3z5ule2fv@garhos>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 22:04:19 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx01.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="KCXegvZb5vh43D+f3BR6Ew";
	logging-data="22686"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/EsBH03a9+ktNlC15Ut9KIwM647yE3ljg="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:J6vzd4qatewgHDb1NI9rwzRkAI0=
	sha1:Z/vT89tvJ4gMEpInLjyS98vrpK8=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13249
Date: 2010-08-13T23:04:17+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> writes:

> Le Fri, 13 Aug 2010 21:50:07 +0200, Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
> a écrit:
>> I've more often come across the latter.
>>
>> Could consider
>>
>> generic
>>    type Formal_Foo is ...
>> package Generic_S is
>>    subtype Foo is Formal_Foo;
>>
> The trouble with this one, is that it move the case to the client
> side... I would not like to generic instantiations “obfuscated” with
> all of those  Formal_Foo (I always use named parameter
> associations... especially with  generic instantiations).
>
> The Dmitry way, which is also the one I use, end to be less intrusive,
> as the client of the generic package is less likely to have to spell
> this  somewhere (except if it/he/she has to use a formal parameter of
> a given  instantiated package to instantiate another).

Well, I couldn't see how Dmitry's "Foo_Of" would make sense as it was
being read.

   procedure P (Q : Generic_S.Foo_Of);   -- huh?

I suppose one could say

   generic
      type Foo is ...
   package Generic_S is
      subtype Actual_Foo is Foo;

(since we're adopting the "spelt-out prefix" style, Generic_, rather
than the "abbreviated suffix" style, _G !)

though I see that the last time I used it was the other way round ..

   generic
      type Actual_Foo is ...
   package Generic_S is
      subtype Foo is Actual_Foo;