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: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Received: by 10.68.211.136 with SMTP id nc8mr5104230pbc.6.1335504186714;
        Thu, 26 Apr 2012 22:23:06 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 r9ni103244pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!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: What would you like in Ada202X?
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 07:23:05 +0200
Organization: Ada @ Home
Message-ID: <op.wderwrjxule2fv@douda-yannick>
References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5>
 <9af5eaaa-1c48-4455-a8e8-39dd9ee8092d@ot8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
 <op.wdcj0snyule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <bjg1nrfssv58$.1f05frcj5q54s$.dlg@40tude.net> <jnco48$35q$1@munin.nbi.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wY6GHhmRj4EhIK4JUTxy2A.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.62 (Linux)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
Date: 2012-04-27T07:23:05+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le Fri, 27 Apr 2012 02:09:38 +0200, Randy Brukardt <randy@rrsoftware.com=
>  =

a =C3=A9crit:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message
> news:bjg1nrfssv58$.1f05frcj5q54s$.dlg@40tude.net...
> ...
>> My complaint has always been that Ada should finally take the policy =
 =

>> that
>> name conflicts shall be treated as errors if not explicitly resolved.=
  =

>> That
>> would nullify your example, because there will be no context with
>> undistinguishable X.
>
> Not sure what you mean by this; Ada has always had that policy. Indeed=
,
> there was a formal proof for Ada 95 that there were no Beaujolias effe=
cts
> (which is essentially the same thing).
Formal proof? Or did you mean strong certitudes?

-- =

=E2=80=9CSyntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.=E2=80=9D [1]
=E2=80=9CStructured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.=
=E2=80=9D [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming =E2=80=94 Alan J. =E2=80=94 P. Yale Univers=
ity