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: 103376,5bcc293dc5642650 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8 Received: by 10.68.38.134 with SMTP id g6mr11785296pbk.6.1319126071065; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 08:54:31 -0700 (PDT) Path: d5ni36244pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!feeder.news-service.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?= =?utf-8?Q?=29?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Why no Ada.Wide_Directories? Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:54:28 +0200 Organization: Ada @ Home Message-ID: References: <9937871.172.1318575525468.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prib32> <418b8140-fafb-442f-b91c-e22cc47f8adb@y22g2000pri.googlegroups.com> <7156122c-b63f-487e-ad1b-0edcc6694a7a@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com> <409c81ab-bd54-493b-beb4-a0cca99ec306@p27g2000prp.googlegroups.com> <1rlz5gwqmeizn$.fwqpl0mhzf54$.dlg@40tude.net> <1w7i4ekc7yvjx$.60o908ry5lhc$.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: +k5S0hp3h+egIFHMcKbMnA.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.51 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:14114 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Date: 2011-10-20T17:54:28+02:00 List-Id: Le Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:31:59 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov = a =C3=A9crit: > I am not a language designer. I have problems rather than solutions. Like many of us here ;) > What I know is that the decomposition shall go along the types. You use to say you don't feel FP good, but I sware, I am sure you would = = enjoy some part of it ;) > Implementation must be absolutely free too > choose. There shall be no procedures but operations on types. All type= s > shall have classes. What's missing from Interface type introduced with Ada 2005 ? Doesn't it= = fulfill the above expectations ? (also keep in mind sometime efficiency = is = required, and if you want place formalism over efficiency, then you have= = to sacrifice efficiency, conscientiously). > Any syntax sugar (prefix notation, infix operations, > assignments, indexing, member extraction, aggregates, entries, = > attributes) shall be operations. Are you sure you are not confused between concrete syntax and abstract = syntax ? Otherwise, if I may reword you, perhaps you are complaining the= re = are not enough user re-definable operations. Otherwise, I don't see what= 's = relevant in turning syntactic sugar into operations; these plays two = different roles and are of orthogonal domains. > Construction model must be type safe (in particular, > each type must have constructors, including class-wide types). The typ= e > system shall support both specialization and generalization. Could you provide an example case of generalization you have in mind ? > The programmer > should be able to enforce static type and constraint checks, in = > particular, > to convert any potentially dynamic checks into compile-time errors. Al= l > exceptions must be typed, contracted and statically checked. This is not a language topic, instead, a technology level topic. I feel = = runtime check is a reasonable fall-back for what cannot be statically = checked in th actual state of the technology. If you really require stat= ic = check, then you must restrict yourself to what can be statically checked= . = If Ada 2012 defines some Design by Contract checks as runtime check, thi= s = is not a language flaw, a pragmatic choice. Along with that, if a compil= er = is able to statically check what Ada 2012 designate as runtime check, th= en = nothing in the language definition disallows the compiler to apply all = static checks it is able to. -- = =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