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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,73175d2d01a1b1dd
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!feeder.news-service.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?=
 =?utf-8?Q?=29?=
 <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: subprogram must not be deeper than access type
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 06:30:45 +0200
Organization: Ada @ Home
Message-ID: <op.v2s75jaiule2fv@index.ici>
References: <slrnj7trhq.i18.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
 <818752663338654817.822041rmhost.bauhaus-maps.arcor.de@news.arcor.de>
 <slrnj80ieh.i18.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
 <wccmxdr772s.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <j5qieh$92b$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wc8b5Gz2brMDJGVD+LmnUQ.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.51 (Linux)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21260
Date: 2011-10-04T06:30:45+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:59:55 +0200, Jeffrey Carter  =

<spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org> a =C3=A9crit:

> On 09/26/2011 06:43 AM, Robert A Duff wrote:
>> Natasha Kerensikova<lithiumcat@gmail.com>  writes:
>>
>>> Having read the Rationale 2005, I understand now that naming an acce=
ss
>>> type is far from being equivalent to text replacement.
>>
>> Yeah.  That's a language design flaw.
>
> I think anonymous types are the language design flaw.

There were introduced for the need of anonymous access type to  =

subprograms, but 1) were applied to objects in the while 2) there were  =

probably alternatives (as the mentioned rational recognized). So, may be=
  =

you are right. I confess I don't really enjoy anonymous access type too.=


Except that if I'm not wrong, anonymous access type were also introduced=
  =

for the need of some parts of I/O packages. Someone can tell more ?


-- =

=E2=80=9CSyntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.=E2=80=9D  [Ep=
igrams on  =

Programming =E2=80=94 Alan J. =E2=80=94 P. Yale University]
=E2=80=9CStructured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.=
=E2=80=9D [Idem]
Java: Write once, Never revisit