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,d2c21e8238e985b5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-28 19:33:14 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!xmission!news-out.spamkiller.net!propagator2-maxim!propagator-maxim!news-in.spamkiller.net!news.he.net!dimensional.com!pulsar.dimensional.com!coop.net!world!news
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: Extended modal types
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Message-ID: <wccd6vfelbs.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 02:31:35 GMT
References: <3CEDFF90.B94D7E32@yahoo.com>
 <5ee5b646.0205250757.60c9715a@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24893
Date: 2002-05-29T02:31:35+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:

> Actually a bit of history as to how this mistake came to
> pass is of interest:
...
> Tuck and Bob responded that they had a commitment to 
> implement the URG recommendations, and claimed that the
> URG had recommended this. As chair of the URG, I knew
> just how wrong this was :-) 

Robert,

Your history is slightly wrong.  I never wanted to have non-binary
modular types, and I agree with you that they are a mistake.

Modular types are one of my least favorite features of Ada 95.
If anybody cares, I could rant for several paragraphs about
what's wrong with them.

- Bob