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 10.68.246.229 with SMTP id xz5mr5143754pbc.1.1368583776320;
        Tue, 14 May 2013 19:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 bp1ni2329pbd.1!nntp.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.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: Sat, 11 May 2013 09:08:31 +0200
Organization: Ada @ Home
Message-ID: <op.wwwrghefule2fv@cardamome>
References: <op.wv8jh1c1ule2fv@cardamome> <op.wwbvqzkeule2fv@cardamome>
 <op.wwnp2zkrule2fv@cardamome> <km9k8v$fam$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <1luaso698dpcc$.rrv8385qwl92.dlg@40tude.net> <kmbo4g$cq9$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <1xlzfj8qy1zey$.up1s1v3syagv.dlg@40tude.net> <kmed24$f10$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <1nw4bxyvk1gj5.xmiirr0diavq$.dlg@40tude.net> <kmh4o5$rqt$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <1q07vm77kfwla$.1cz0xwxspxhay.dlg@40tude.net> <kmk57n$hf$1@loke.gir.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: Sz+Cz+YCi2SKRtUDNsu0BQ.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
X-Received-Bytes: 3071
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
Date: 2013-05-11T09:08:31+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le Sat, 11 May 2013 03:00:39 +0200, Randy Brukardt <randy@rrsoftware.com=
>  =

a =C3=A9crit:

>> Yes, I say that unimportant types need not to be exposed in public
>> interfaces.
>>
>> Everything declared in the *same* scope is equally important, or else=
  =

>> you
>> have a design issue.
>
> What utter nonsense.
>
> Ada.Text_IO defines Count, File_Type, File_Mode, Field, and Number_Bas=
e
> types. If you think these are all equally important for the primary ta=
sk  =

> of
> doing I/O, you have a real problem with perspective. File_Type does al=
l  =

> of
> the work, while the rest just raise the abstraction level a bit.

I don't feel Dmitry talked about amount of work done when he introduced =
 =

=E2=80=9Cimportance=E2=80=9D. I'm guessing it was about importance for t=
he abstraction and  =

so its usability. That also depend on the abstraction level. The most  =

abstract is surely File_Type, then File_Mode comes next while not  =

necessarily, then Field and Number_Base, depends if these specialisation=
s  =

are required.

If something is said not that much important, it should be removable, or=
  =

else, what means not important? If that's not important in some case whi=
le  =

important for some others, then there should be different child packages=
  =

or parallel hierarchy (with one withing another). Seems to be basic desi=
gn  =

rules.

-- =

=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