From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Subject: Re: Why can't Ada use dot notation on private types?
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 17:26:38 -0600
Date: 2017-02-08T17:26:38-06:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <o7g9fe$q23$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: o7am71$13o1$1@gioia.aioe.org
"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message
news:o7am71$13o1$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> On 2017-02-06 20:44, Randy Brukardt wrote:
>
>> The problems mainly come from the possibility of implicit .all and
>> 'Access.
>
> Perfect, why is this a problem? It is just what is needed. I want to
> override "all", so let me do this.
When elementary types are included in prefix notation, there are potentially
an infinite number of implicit .all or 'Access combinations. A compiler
would have trouble figuring them out (aand it could get *very* expensive),
and a reader would be even more confused.
Randy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-08 23:26 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
2017-02-06 19:44 ` Randy Brukardt
2017-02-06 20:27 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2017-02-08 23:26 ` Randy Brukardt [this message]
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