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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,1dd28d5040ded1f8 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-09 13:02:31 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Announce: Grace project site operational Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 15:02:47 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3612.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3719.2500 X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23799 Date: 2002-05-09T15:02:47-05:00 List-Id: M�rio Amado Alves wrote in message ... >"Is there no way a generic type parameter can have a default value ?" >(LK) > >"Not a *type* parameter, no. Perhaps this is something that should be >looked at for the next Ada revision?" (TED) > >Hmmm... This is the essence of a previous thread initiated by myself on >'types as objects', which, if I remember correctly, lead to reflexion >with an example from an ASIS application. The subject dropped silently >then, so I should guess no, it will not make it into the next Ada >revision. Supporting default parameters for generic types would be (I think) a whole lot simpler than 'types as objects'. Ada has default parameters for generic subprogram parameters, why not types? Something like: type Count is (<>) use Natural; seems like it would work. Probably worth thinking about a bit. (Warning: I have made no effort to think about the ramifications of this idea!!) Randy.