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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,b6e97963d32ee242 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-21 09:43:27 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!uninett.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: The old "Object.Method" syntax debate Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 16:43:27 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: <254c16a.0305210726.485125de@posting.google.com> <3ECBA778.4070909@crs4.it> NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1053535407 13044 129.241.83.78 (21 May 2003 16:43:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 16:43:27 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37596 Date: 2003-05-21T16:43:27+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > Jacob Sparre Andersen writes: > >> Will the change mean that currently legal programs will have to be >> rewritten? > > No. The ARG is very concerned about compatibility, and would never make > a change that would cause everybody to have to rewrite their Ada > programs. But how is it done? I mean how can the compiler know that a procedure say: procedure Marry (Person : Man; Person2 : Woman); should be able to call like this: type Him : Man; type Her : Woman; Him.Marry (Her); -- or Her.Marry (Him); If I have understood the change suggested. Would it not make the language ambigous? -- Preben Randhol http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/