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
X-Google-Thread: 103376,aae01e0853bff01c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-17 03:36:53 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!news.iks-jena.de!not-for-mail
From: Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@iks-jena.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Should MI be supported (was:  Can MI be supported?)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:36:52 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: IKS GmbH Jena
Message-ID: <slrnbmgea2.nu.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
References: <mailman.2.1063700632.302.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <u4qzd6lm3.fsf@earthlink.net> <3F67D0FA.9020506@attbi.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: taranis.iks-jena.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: branwen.iks-jena.de 1063795012 20911 217.17.192.37 (17 Sep 2003
 10:36:52 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@iks-jena.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:36:52 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42609
Date: 2003-09-17T10:36:52+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

* Robert I. Eachus wrote:
> I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this.  I personally find
> the mixin idiom to be more natural than the view conversion approach.

So do I.

> But Ada allows both, and in fact several other ways to code the same
> example, and we are talking about adding one more.

No. The discussion is about adding a high level abstraction which can be
implemented in any way.

> But this is how it should be.  Ada should allow you to express a model
> using whatever patterns are most appropriate.  If we disagree on which
> patterns to use, well that is a style issue, not something where there
> is a definite right or wrong.

Patterns or idioms usually point to a hole in the abstraction level of the
language.

> G�del's Proof basically says that any programming language must be either
> incomplete or inconsistant.

https://www.iks-jena.de/mitarb/lutz/usenet/Fachbegriffe.der.Informatik.html#293

  Halting Problem
     After proofing the impossibility of the general case, the programmer
     denies to implement any possible solution for important, ordinary cases.