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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,34d47d048b177d0b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Jon S Anthony Subject: Re: limited/non-limited in Ada95 Date: 1997/10/23 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 282698206 References: <3442C2A3.3781@bix.com> <62n5c3$m8n@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> Distribution: world Organization: PSINet Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-10-23T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) writes: Oh yeah, > against Robert Dewar's word, and against Bob Duff's word, and more > to the Since when is argument from authority at all relevant here? Actually, I don't see any argument here at all - on either side. As I say, this is a tradeoff situation where opinion on what is the best of a set of bad ways to solve something is what is being discussed. > point against Bob Duff's constructive proof? What constructive "proof"? There's nothing I don't/didn't know about this approach - I even tried it (as _stated_). This is not about "can you do this in Ada?" Of course you can - that's a ridiculous point. /Jon -- Jon Anthony Synquiry Technologies, Ltd., Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari