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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ab1d177a5a26577d
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!feeder.news-service.com!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: What's wrong with C++?
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: 
 <1ee1a434-4048-48f6-9f5e-d8126bebb808@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
 <b1f0b153-dc79-4b3c-a936-68723e76a4db@x1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <jbejuuszjy3y.vyllayr73kh0$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <alpine.WNT.2.00.1102170835130.5612@WHIRLWIND>
 <17coueqbf1p27.1g0wj3010saxe$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4d5d4bec$0$13901$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 19:22:12 +0100
Message-ID: <ozyractolml5.e0zb3m4rndjp.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Feb 2011 19:22:08 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: be88000e.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=P_U>\f6B<c5TQL:hoD@>T?4IUK<Cl32<14Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;72S`E2=fYY<[6LHn;2LCV>[<mhadbfdU;LgeJDC9f8C=Si]CUKY47:1
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:18318
Date: 2011-02-17T19:22:08+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 11:25:13 -0500, Hyman Rosen wrote:

> On 2/17/2011 11:12 AM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 08:38:25 -0500, Peter C. Chapin wrote:
>>> Could you elaborate a little on why you think type inference is bad?
>>
>>A variety of objections...
> 
> And your objections are wrong because there are plenty
> of types that can usefully be inferred by the compiler

Yes, some trivial subtypes like "in T", "out T", "in out T". But I want no
non-trivial inference. "access T" is already too much.

> and which can be written by the programmer only with
> difficulty (at least in C++). Iterators over containers
> are a prime example.

No need to have iterators, indices do the job. I want the index type
manifested when the container type is declared, just as Ada 83 does when an
array is declared.

> If I have a C++ map<string, int>
> and I look something up, I have to declare

I want an array here. STL was a wrong idea and I don't like Ada.Containers
following it.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de