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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,6b6619eb9cada212 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Preben Randhol Subject: Re: Help me to chose between ADA 95 and C++ Date: 1999/12/15 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 560948981 References: <01bf37fb$a91afb60$0564a8c0@IS-D2D04C.test> <829rbv$a8m$1@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net> <01bf3e32$0b9dc880$022a6282@dieppe> <385112AE.7E2CFA9@rdel.co.uk> <38564CD6.F13F69FB@rdel.co.uk> X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no X-Trace: kopp.stud.ntnu.no 945261915 11104 129.241.83.82 (15 Dec 1999 12:45:15 GMT) Organization: ProgramVareVerkstedet NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Dec 1999 12:45:15 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-12-15T12:45:15+00:00 List-Id: Stephen Leake writes: | I just wasted a couple of hours on a closely related problem, which I | propose we call "the snark effect" (see thread "hunting snarks"). I | changed the profile of the base type operation (one parameter changed | from "in out" to "access" to avoid an accesibility problem). But I | forgot to change one of the operations in one of the (many) derived | types. In similar situations, Ada catches such errors (ie, change spec | but forget to change body). I'd like Ada to catch this as well. Yes. :-) But how should the Ada compiler know that you meant to write: procedure Eat and not procedure Eats I may have misunderstood the original request, but I don't see how the Ada compiler could know if you wanted to write Eat or not here. -- Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- [http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/] "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling." -- Athol Fugard