Re: Unknown constraints and type composition

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On 2018-06-14 17:37, Alejandro R. Mosteo wrote:
> I think I have read somewhere that types with unknown constraints are a 
> good way of ensuring you (or your users) don't end with uninitialized 
> values:
> 
> types Whatever (<>) is [limited] private;
> 
> function Create return Whatever;
> 
> This seems nice at first sight but when these types have any likelihood 
> of ending as members of another type you will hit the "unconstrained 
> member" problem.

As well as problems with publicly derived types.

> A workaround then is to use a Indefinite_Holder, but that's an 
> imposition on your clients (ugly). If your type is furthermore limited, 
> then you must use pointers and consider providing controlledness and 
> deallocation in the enclosing type (uglier).
> 
> Right now I'm on the point of a new design where I have many 
> interrelated types that require initialization calls (it's a C binding). 
> And, as always, I'm unsure of the way to go, or if I'm missing another 
> technique without shortcomings. Your thoughts if you have any on this 
> issue are much appreciated.

Without constructors there is no solution to the problem.

In large projects instead of holder I use a reference-counted controlled 
handle. The target's type declaration goes into private packages. The 
handles go to the public interface packages. It is tedious [*], but it 
the only working method if you want to enforce construction and hide 
implementation.

-----------------------
* Because of parallel types hierarchy, lack of delegation support, lack 
of interface inheritance.

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