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,b6e97963d32ee242
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-22 07:56:04 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.uchicago.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: The old "Object.Method" syntax debate
Date: 22 May 2003 10:56:03 -0400
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wccd6ib81z0.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <254c16a.0305210726.485125de@posting.google.com>
 <vcn7svfjbannd6@corp.supernews.com> <3ECBA778.4070909@crs4.it>
 <wcc1xysz2bq.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <3ECC9B36.514A9B35@imag.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1053615363 32267 199.172.62.241 (22 May 2003 14:56:03
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:56:03 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37645
Date: 2003-05-22T10:56:03-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Xavier Nicollin <Xavier.Nicollin@imag.fr> writes:

> Robert A Duff wrote:
> > 
> > Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@crs4.it> writes:
> > 
> > > Will the change mean that currently legal programs will have to be
> > > rewritten?
> > 
> > No.  The ARG is very concerned about compatibility, and would never make
> > a change that would cause everybody to have to rewrite their Ada
> > programs.
> 
> What about something like the following:
> 
> package A_Package is
> 
>    type A_Type is tagged record
>       A_Name : Integer;
>    end record;
> 
>    function A_Name (Obj : A_Type) return Integer;
> 
> end A_Package;
> 
> with A_Package; use A_Package;
> ...
> Obj : A_Type;
> N : Integer := Obj.A_Name;
>                ^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> This is currently perfectly legal, but I guess it would be refused
> by any compiler with the change in effect.

No.  As I said, the ARG would never seriously consider such an
incompatible change.

>... Or would the syntax for the
> function call be
>    Obj.A_Name ()
> ?!!?

No.  AI-252 addresses this issue by using visibility rules similar to
use clauses.  See the AI if you want to know the details.  If you find
any mistakes (such as cases where the AI introduces an incompatibility),
please let the ARG know!

The ARG will tolerate incompatible changes only in extremely obscure
cases.

- Bob