From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Why can't Ada use dot notation on private types?
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 16:31:49 +0100
Date: 2017-02-05T16:31:49+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <o77gh4$6vf$1@gioia.aioe.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: d1956163-4a96-4e39-97d5-0a516e9a954c@googlegroups.com
On 2017-02-05 15:17, Lucretia wrote:
> A lot of people dislike the fact that you cannot use dot notation on
> a tagged type if it's private. Is there a reason for this? Surely the
> compiler knows it's tagged when it looks it up?
I don't know why it is tied to certain types.
Surely it is a syntactic property of an argument of a subprogram. It
must be user-defined.
There is nothing here specific for tagged types, except that for a
primitive operation all its instances could share the property if the
argument is controlling, which again, is merely a convenience rule.
P.S. if Ada had record type interface, member operations would be a part
of the interface. No magic needed.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-05 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-05 14:17 Why can't Ada use dot notation on private types? Lucretia
2017-02-05 15:31 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
2017-02-06 19:44 ` Randy Brukardt
2017-02-06 20:27 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2017-02-08 23:26 ` Randy Brukardt
2017-02-09 8:47 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2017-02-06 19:40 ` Randy Brukardt
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox