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: 103376,8ceb83dbf250e264
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: Problem with instantiating generic procedure
Date: 1999/07/19
Message-ID: <wcck8rwejsq.fsf@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 502747900
Sender: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
References: <7mqfcq$9og$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-07-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

mgk25@cl.cam.ac.uk (Markus Kuhn) writes:

> What is wrong with simply implementing a procedure declared
> in the spec file in the body file by instantiating it from
> a generic procedure of the exact same signature? ...

Nothing, except that it's illegal.  ;-)

The Ada 9X design team proposed to allow this, but it was not considered
important enough -- any language change has some cost, and the benefit
of allowing this is not huge.

Note that in Ada 83, the renaming-as-body didn't exist, so you had to
write a whole wrapper body.

- Bob
-- 
Change robert to bob to get my real email address.  Sorry.