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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: grassroots thoughts on access types
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 16:51:40 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc7erjtcsz.fsf@TheWorld.com>
References: <5d9134c9-a7d4-468e-8685-ebbb393eabea@googlegroups.com>
	<p5kk5i$5fj$1@dont-email.me> <p5kl6u$12m5$1@gioia.aioe.org>
	<p5krq3$103$1@dont-email.me> <wcck1vlex4t.fsf@TheWorld.com>
	<p5l4nl$4hm$1@dont-email.me> <wcc6074a6l8.fsf@TheWorld.com>
	<p5p70u$cr0$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell02.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Trace: pcls7.std.com 1518385900 22074 192.74.137.72 (11 Feb 2018 21:51:40
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 21:51:40 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:k5MOyKqGsJuG/M/VNg1Kc9A6dyE=
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50380
Date: 2018-02-11T16:51:40-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org> writes:

> I don't use Ada 12 because it's only supported by one compiler, so I
> don't use these forms. But that doesn't answer your question, either.
>
> There are no anonymous access types in your examples of using these
> forms because using them doesn't require writing any. So if I used Ada
> 12 I wouldn't have any real problem with using such forms for constructs
> that already provide them. However, since I won't write any anonymous
> access types, I would not provide the ability to use such forms with
> anything I wrote. As it might be confusing to use these forms with some
> constructs and not with others, my code would probably be easier to read
> if I eschewed such forms.

Understood.  Thanks.

For what it's worth, I found the containers packages to
be almost intolerable to use until the syntactic sugar was
added.  I don't particularly like how one defines types
with such syntactic sugar, but using it is easy.

- Bob