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
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.albasani.net!newsfeed.xs3.de!io.xs3.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada Successor Language
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:11:08 -0500
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <ph63os$1gr$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: 
 <5e86db65-84b9-4b5b-9aea-427a658b5ae7@googlegroups.com><878t7u1cfm.fsf@nightsong.com><c22391d4-94b6-4ed3-96c0-1e9a84c4a99c@googlegroups.com><b1141508-e692-46f6-b536-4a72081dfb45@googlegroups.com><foqeocF7l4fU1@mid.individual.net>
 <pg949k$jmv$1@dont-email.me><foqjvhF8kskU1@mid.individual.net><776f3645-ed0c-4118-9b4d-21660e3bba4b@googlegroups.com><pg9bd9$eo9$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <87602fbu2g.fsf@nightsong.com><pgad3n$1sop$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <87po0mziqt.fsf@nightsong.com><pgbm5e$c1l$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <87fu1izfgs.fsf@nightsong.com> <ly4lhyj5gb.fsf@pushface.org>
Injection-Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 20:11:08 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="1563"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53443
Date: 2018-06-29T15:11:08-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Simon Wright" <simon@pushface.org> wrote in message 
news:ly4lhyj5gb.fsf@pushface.org...
> Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>
>> Oh hmm, ok, that's interesting.  But I'm surprised that the LRM is
>> loose enough to allow two observably different implementations like
>> that.
>
> "observably"? how? code size of the generic will change, not sure that
> overall code size will, & anyway who cares?

Performance changes, too. But you really have to look in the cracks to see 
the differences. Ada uses "assume-the-worst" rules in generic bodies, so 
code that would actually execute differently under one scheme or the other 
would be illegal.

                           Randy.