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: a07f3367d7,735c710b5e547bad X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.224.59.73 with SMTP id k9mr1410888qah.4.1343314891117; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:01:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.66.84.38 with SMTP id v6mr1666246pay.7.1343312324830; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 07:18:44 -0700 (PDT) Path: a15ni105485768qag.0!nntp.google.com!q21no17058199qas.0!news-out.google.com!b9ni61428159pbl.0!nntp.google.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!novia!news-peer1!btnet!zen.net.uk!hamilton.zen.co.uk!xlned.com!feeder5.xlned.com!ramfeed-1.ams.xsnews.nl!feed.xsnews.nl!border-3.ams.xsnews.nl!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!news.swapon.de!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada 2005 puzzle Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 13:18:05 +0200 Organization: cbb software GmbH Message-ID: References: <1arp60wtxes8h$.1qs6bt732ztgp.dlg@40tude.net> <030cde76-7435-405d-9f12-ac7f730ecab8@googlegroups.com> <1f9q6vk5z2r3t$.1hayo9rmxfwu7$.dlg@40tude.net> <7308644e-bfbe-44c1-8359-d67392d483e1@googlegroups.com> <72bc2c23-4a1c-4c09-985e-8cc4c0fd957f@googlegroups.com> <1uli63mb1e82x.11cuz41guddr5.dlg@40tude.net> <87boj8az0z.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: 9A8bJrx4NhDLcSmbrb6AdA.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 X-Received-Bytes: 1832 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 2012-07-22T13:18:05+02:00 List-Id: On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 12:08:44 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Dmitry A. Kazakov: > >> The problem is that a *new* limited object cannot be result of a function, >> this is conceptually broken. > > The compiler can rewrite the function and its call, passing the new > object to a continuation, so it's not really impossible to implement. Broken concepts are indeed possible to implement. Such implementations are sometimes called "logical errors" or just "bugs." -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de