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,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f5de0f20558e30f2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-14 20:27:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.uchicago.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!oleane.net!oleane!freenix!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: Richard Riehle Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Implicit Instantiations - was: Re: Why is Ada NOT a good choice for a beginner to programming? Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:35:22 -0800 Organization: AdaWorks Software Engineering Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: References: Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1042604823 45907 137.194.161.2 (15 Jan 2003 04:27:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 04:27:03 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk X-Reply-To: richard@adaworks.com List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:33027 Date: 2003-01-14T20:35:22-08:00 "Grein, Christoph" wrote: > > "Grein, Christoph" wrote: > > > > > It is true, there are some places in Ada where implicit declarations or type > > > conversions are done, but implicit instantiations are as yet nowhere. > > > > Implicit type conversions, along with implicit type promotions run > > counter to the Ada philosophy. > > > > C++ does not provide the same kind of capability for declaring new > > numeric types one has in Ada. This, in spite of the entertaining > > example from Mr. Rosen. > > > > Typedef does not do the same thing. We are still left with predefined > > types. > > > > The whole idea of Ada is to declare types so they will be checked by > > the compiler and so mismatches will be caught. If there is a problem > > with that, in the current standard, it needs to be fixed, but implicit > > conversions or promotions is simply a bad idea for this language. > > > > Actually, I don't think there is really a problem here wrt Ada, even > > after reading your paper. > > > > Richard Riehle > > Richard, > > from where in my paper do you get the impression that I might think there is a > problem with Ada? I only state that there is no good way to do dimension > checking during compile-time. > > I find the C++ example doing compile-time checking intriguing and I thought it > might be nice to have something like this in Ada. My concern was that adding > implicit instantiations to Ada might harm other parts of the language. So we > have the same opinion wrt this point. Chris, Sorry if I misread something in your paper. Richard