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: 103376,99f33f51845a7793
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-19 13:16:29 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: "Matthew Heaney" <mheaney@on2.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: 'withing' problem [code generation]
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:20:00 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <tvitld57lmk003@corp.supernews.com>
References: <3be27344$0$227$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>
 <MRyE7.10079$xS6.13799@www.newsranger.com>
 <x7vofmki7mm.fsf@smaug.pushface.org> <3BE42900.7590E899@adaworks.com>
 <3be65f4c$0$237$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>
 <tuoetohbaump12@corp.supernews.com> <x7vu1w2bil4.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
 <tuvpi2sl62cbdf@corp.supernews.com> <x7vy9lbxih0.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
 <tv55kecu56i1f@corp.supernews.com> <x7vu1vv6b02.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
 <3BF6E4DF.FA47ACDB@adaworks.com> <x7vd72gi0zm.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
 <tvi8pl3ebdgqb2@corp.supernews.com> <3BF93F0F.D5E4D0B7@Raytheon.com>
 <u3d3aeavn.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16701
Date: 2001-11-19T16:20:00-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Stephen Leake" <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
news:u3d3aeavn.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov...
> The point here is that extending Ada with "with type" allows some
> "circularities" to be directly represented, without any user or tool
> interaction.

The circularity can already be directly represented, by simply
forward-declaring one of the types.  A language change is only necessary in
order to change the syntax of the forward declaration, and to remove the
(small) run-time penalty.

(I should also add, "in order to interface to IDL and Java." But in the
latter case, still more language changes would be required, e.g. interface
types.)

>For example, assume your UML model has the Doctor -> Patient
>circularity. The first time you generate code, it may decide to break
>the circularity by using a forward declaration for Doctor. Now you
>tweak the model a bit, and it decides to forward declare Patient. Not
>a Good Thing!

I don't understand this argument.  If you're using a code generator, then
what difference does it make what code is generated?  If you care that much,
then why don't you just write the code manually?