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: 103376,9ce5fb49dc74582f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.megapath.net!news.megapath.net.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:22:33 -0600 From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <1163959439.299036.129940@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> <87mz6nnt4v.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <20061119202320.19149a2f@cube.tz.axivion.com> <4560D5BE.5060508@obry.net> <1164059458.442430.110710@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4562a51a$0$27404$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr> <45633396.10704@obry.net> Subject: Re: generic question Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:23:07 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.32.209.38 X-Trace: sv3-rxI6TOrwNZ2C3/3KghPV0PyCOX+k90GmWyDZ8ZepnBYAZArml2lVMPLIYx+1tykpU5z3G8Bil0ANFaf!iDxMnl/x519ADoIRz8MMqARgT8jHNKcPn/zxnoyJaa0RJ/sGS5dp3+7kxbw6fgAiIjMUKzu935rR!ZffYff+ypXqmUQ== X-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7731 Date: 2006-11-28T15:23:07-06:00 List-Id: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote in message news:okqggs99v1j5$.p2upxltb2tgs$.dlg@40tude.net... > On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:58:24 -0600, Randy Brukardt wrote: ... > > And, yes, I was against the expansion of the uses of anonymous > > access types in Ada 2007. I lost that discussion primarily because I didn't > > have a reasonable alternative for the second bullet above. > > Was it so important to compensate for all disadvantages access types bring > with? I guess so. The second bullet is about cases where an access type needed to be exported anyway; there's no expansion in use implied. Limited with doesn't allow exporting an access type (and we tried a number of ways to allow that, but they didn't work without causing implementation and use problems -- for instance, it wasn't possible to determine the appropriate storage pool). One could argue that programmers shouldn't be exporting access types in the first place, but that would not reflect the way many programmers use Ada. And efforts to force people to do the right thing tend to be doomed - better to avoid hamstringing people (which might cause them to change to a less well-designed language). Randy.