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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!gandalf.srv.welterde.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Annoyances Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 15:41:25 -0500 Organization: JSA Research & Innovation Message-ID: References: <1ac5a44b-4423-443a-a7bb-2864d9abe78f@googlegroups.com> <1498048151.20885.28.camel@obry.net> <96174ea5-852d-44e9-8535-7c1eb24d5326@googlegroups.com> <8d3aff06-82df-485f-89e5-a50c326aab05@googlegroups.com> <66aa262e-2ac9-4016-b32d-e9fee14779e1@googlegroups.com> <88e2f18a-0786-4303-a5b8-fe82e8c81dcb@googlegroups.com> <71c4fdcd-4213-4b84-b852-c8674cfaf717@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: rrsoftware.com X-Trace: franka.jacob-sparre.dk 1498596086 22917 24.196.82.226 (27 Jun 2017 20:41:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 20:41:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:47149 Date: 2017-06-27T15:41:25-05:00 List-Id: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote in message news:oit1at$2vo$1@gioia.aioe.org... > On 26/06/2017 23:40, Randy Brukardt wrote: ... >> As I tried to say yesterday, Ada does have a flaw in that allows >> dispatching >> calls within contructors (and more generally, inside of any primitive >> operations). That requires work of some sort, but it is possible, and it >> shouldn't be. > > Hmm, but what are you going to do about Rosen's trick? All use-cases where > it is used (to work around language problems, constructors included) must > be eliminated first. Only then re-dispatch could (and must) be outlawed. Avoid it? I've never used it in actual code, because it never seemed to save anything (and it forces using limited types, which I avoid as much as possible). I've always used an allocated "real-data-part" in the cases where the Rosen trick might have helped. So I can't really say anything intelligent here. Randy.