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: a07f3367d7,39579ad87542da0e
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
X-Received: by 10.224.10.6 with SMTP id n6mr22368185qan.4.1368583541994;
        Tue, 14 May 2013 19:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 y6ni44334qax.0!nntp.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!nrc-news.nrc.ca!News.Dal.Ca!news.litech.org!news.etla.org!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: Seeking for papers about tagged types vs access to subprograms
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 05:47:20 +0200
Organization: Ada @ Home
Message-ID: <op.wwung605ule2fv@cardamome>
References: <op.wv8jh1c1ule2fv@cardamome> <op.wwnp2zkrule2fv@cardamome>
 <u3jaslg5kca7.1gk5ds3d4sx2y$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.wwnsmtteule2fv@cardamome>
 <17ceq51ydy3s0.s94miqqzbg5w.dlg@40tude.net> <op.wwny5jerule2fv@cardamome>
 <1vrhb7oc4qbob$.q02vuouyovp5$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.wwn4oak8ule2fv@cardamome>
 <19lrzzbgm77v6.1dzpgqckptaj6.dlg@40tude.net> <kmbohm$elb$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <p0pf97g5w6xg.jhca6ztjwpde$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.wwq9s4l6ule2fv@cardamome>
 <1bfhq7jo34xpi.p8n2vq6yjsea.dlg@40tude.net> <op.wwrefx1pule2fv@cardamome>
 <cps71yzogw24$.7ol98fxcaurj$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.wwriky0dule2fv@cardamome>
 <nd22gfeezrwf$.tlj4yyygrwq3$.dlg@40tude.net> <kmecg6$et4$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <12gn9wvv1gwfk.10ikfju4rzmnj.dlg@40tude.net> <kmh7d4$up3$1@loke.gir.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uGUognJZXpdb++Da0QvCqg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.15 (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: 2013-05-10T05:47:20+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le Fri, 10 May 2013 00:19:14 +0200, Randy Brukardt <randy@rrsoftware.com=
>  =

a =C3=A9crit:
> Again, no one said anything about them being isolated. Although I do  =

> think
> that vast majority of types ought to be separate from other types -- t=
he
> interactions being handled in the operations, not in the types  =

> themselves.

Right, except while you say this, the only static check sub=E2=80=91prog=
rams or  =

primitive operations provide, is the one applying on the types of their =
 =

arguments. So there is nothing handled by operations (at least, so far).=


The point is still good enough, as at first sight, seems there are  =

operations which cannot said to be owned by a single type, so that may  =

looks hard to focus on type with this picture. Or else, there is a need =
 =

for a type representing sub=E2=80=91program signature (something I wante=
d to reply  =

to Dmitry in another message), the arguments tuple, then optionally the =
 =

result tuple, and optionally both tuples, say the type of a transition a=
s  =

an example. With this, interactions between types can be represented wit=
h  =

types.


-- =

=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