Re: What would you like in Ada202X?

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

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:47:06 -0700 (PDT), Martin wrote:

> Ok, we don't officially have Ada2012 yet but as no new features are going
> to be added to it, now seems like a good time to start thinking about the
> next revision.
> 
> My starters for 10 are:
> 
> 1) 1st class functions / lambdas

Yep, proper procedural types to get rid of nasty access-to-procedure in 
downward closures. No upward closures however.

Some set of operations to compose procedures, though the syntax for that is 
unclear. I definitely do not want the mess typical for functional 
languages.

> 2) parallel loops / functions

I don't think this is important.

But I do like to see some low-level primitives to support lock-free 
concurrency, like atomic increment etc. The compiler would either use the 
corresponding hardware operations or else generate a protected object if no 
hardware support is there.

> 3) Multiple dispatch

Sure, but there is no working model of. The requirement is that dispatch 
never fails at run-time (statically checked dispatching tables).

4) Full multiple inheritance.

5) Proper constructors and destructors (for all types), enforced, 
exception-safe with roll-back.

6) Delegation, this is related to the position 1.

7) Classes for all types (including by-value types). Inheritance from all 
types protected types and tasks included (one exception could be T'Class 
another, maybe, the procedural types)

8) Interface inheritance from concrete types while dropping the 
implementation.

9) "." (member), "in" (membership test), "'" (attribute), "(" (aggregate), 
":=" made primitive operations.

10) Array index types to be a class. 1st class sets of indices (e.g. 
ranges) and array subtypes (e.g. slices).

11) Package interfaces, transitive "use." I.e. an ability to make things 
visible in some package visible in another without repeating all its with 
and use clauses. And, of course, "use" should imply "with" where 
applicable.

12) Renaming fixed. Renaming shall create no new objects. Renaming shall 
respect array bounds. Renaming shall be available for types and subtypes. 
Renamed entities shall never conflict with what they rename or themselves.

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