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!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!newsfeed.xs3.de!io.xs3.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Musing on defining attributes and the ability to define an
 "abstract type X"-interface.
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 18:12:14 -0500
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <omas4f$s1n$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: <9617c73b-e23e-405b-8544-4d17e7e3ad61@googlegroups.com>
 <okpnfb$9du$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <28512bf1-0c2c-400f-a24f-cc7e0eb8a02d@googlegroups.com>
 <87h8y67trd.fsf@jacob-sparre.dk>
 <ae46a44e-ee1e-42f6-ae8d-a02ae012e31d@googlegroups.com>
 <om32rl$ess$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
 <36a1a83d-f3d7-4e3c-827d-addeadc28ccc@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 23:12:15 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="28727"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:47640
Date: 2017-08-07T18:12:14-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Shark8" <onewingedshark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:36a1a83d-f3d7-4e3c-827d-addeadc28ccc@googlegroups.com...
>!topic Adding an "Abstract Type" to enable simplification of the language 
>definition.
>!reference Ada2012 RM??.??(??)
>!from Edward Fish 17-08-05
>!keywords abstraction, types, simplification
>!discussion

I doubt anyone wants to do a lot of work just to "simplify the language 
definition". By years of experience, there is no such thing -- it will just 
be a *different* language definition, with a different set of pitfalls. 
Remember that the language is maintained almost exclusively by volunteers - 
people are not signing up to make changes for the sake of changes.

My guess is that a proposal like this would go directly to the round file 
(an AC, where it will be ignored forever).

If you want a proposal to be taken seriously, you have to explain the 
problem first, and then optionally give a solution.

As the request for Community Input says:

>For enhancement requests, it is very important to describe the programming
>problem and why the Ada 2012 solution is complex, expensive, or impossible.

                                  Randy.