Re: Rational for not making cursor tagged in Containers

[Ray Blaak <rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net>]

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> I think prefix notation is rubbish. There should be an abstract member
> interface allowing users creation of whatever "members" they wished. So if
> anybody liked prefix notation, he could say: Mumble implements ".Mumble."
> Done. Why should the language do this by default?

Because record types have prefix notation for fields, protected objects have
them for subprograms and entries, tasks have them for entries.

So the real question is, why *not* have them for tagged object methods.

The typical OO languages encourage the obj.method notation, and this is useful
when one thinks of an object as owning its behaviour, rather than the
package/namespace it was declared.

Now if you don't agree with this style of OO approach, then fortunately Ada
allows the Method(obj) notation.

It is the lack of the prefix notation that was probably the primary reason for
turning me into an ex-Ada fanatic.

-- 
Cheers,                                        The Rhythm is around me,
                                               The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak                                      The Rhythm is inside me,
rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net                    The Rhythm has my soul.