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=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e55245590c829bef
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Vinzent Hoefler" <nntp-2010-10@t-domaingrabbing.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Beginners question: Compound types, how-to?
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 20:30:30 +0100
Message-ID: <op.vlnu442n0k3wt7@jellix.jlfencey.com>
References: <86wroy58ff.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan>
 <iale5p$2f6$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <86pqup5xfy.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan>
 <becbd7a4-89e6-4d81-b7d8-7d18ac75c1f9@j2g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
 <86y69d3rec.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan> <ian4b2$p9h$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
 <82lj5c5ecm.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <iapnmm$p5j$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
 <79ed13b7-4c55-40c4-9f66-e30ed94e5591@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>
 <4cd0b0ed$0$6775$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <op.vllu5ena0k3wt7@jellix.jlfencey.com> <m2zktqyuk8.fsf@pushface.org>
 <op.vll53fbj0k3wt7@jellix.jlfencey.com> <op.vlmt5msyule2fv@garhos>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
X-Trace: individual.net wBJGVdoLTRcFsARRxfKvhgy+0qNUXPxEVFoB1jvrqEqYT3KXdd
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0H5qul/cP2mq/hRkShb6fdUsH1s=
User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.63 (Win32)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:16202
Date: 2010-11-04T20:30:30+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 07:11:36 +0100, Yannick Duch=C3=AAne (Hibou57) <yann=
ick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote:

> Le Wed, 03 Nov 2010 22:31:53 +0100, Vinzent Hoefler
> <nntp-2010-10@t-domaingrabbing.de> a =C3=A9crit:
>> See, if you think hard enough, the name problem is solved:
>>
>> Attack_With (Weapon : Offensive_Weapon);
>> Defend_With (Weapon : Defensive_Weapon);
>>
>> Or maybe the other way around:
>>
>> Attack_With (Offensive_Weapon : Weapon);
>> Defend_With (Defensive_Weapon : Weapon);
>
> I don't believe these two are the same : there are two different types=
 in
> the first, while one single type in the second.

Yes, that was intentional.

> The design is not the same
> (an example of how avoiding _Type can direct people to change what the=

> things really are=E2=80=A6 that's bad).

No, the design depends on how you see it. There is no such thing as a si=
ngle,
perfect design, so possible solutions may differ.


Vinzent.

-- =

There is no signature.