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: 103376,604e0f87aa06eab6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-25 08:44:28 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.isc.org!sjc70.webusenet.com!c03.atl99!news.webusenet.com!diablo.voicenet.com!newsfeed.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
Date: 25 Mar 2003 11:44:27 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wccn0jjv1jo.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <mailman.0.1047662587.16695.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <7eee7v4hpvj0i5s345uonlen5315rhiau8@4ax.com>
 <b59ja5$5qc$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <p2vi7vs64p33mpnbsfsn43cvh72l44tm95@4ax.com>
 <4dkea.75440$gi1.38045@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
 <vqil7v81l8p8ocbv2ke9ectl8l33rr3gs8@4ax.com>
 <5115eb96.0303220201.44527637@posting.google.com>
 <b5jrs4$2a6fho$1@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <5115eb96.0303232053.2fcc7d78@posting.google.com>
 <b5nhiq$29oaug$2@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <5115eb96.0303242148.57027600@posting.google.com>
 <6Y_fa.5102$kU.534@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1048610667 9417 199.172.62.241 (25 Mar 2003 16:44:27
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 16:44:27 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:35688
Date: 2003-03-25T11:44:27-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net> writes:

> If there is a way to get the effect of tagged scalar types without a big hit
> on efficiency, however, it would certainly be helpful.

Well, I think efficiency per se is irrelevant to language design.
What matters is distributed overhead -- you don't want to pay
an efficiency cost for features you don't use.

If a feature is useful, then presumably implementers will implement it
in the most efficient way that's reasonable.  It doesn't make sense to
leave out a feature purely because it is inherently slow -- if it's
useful, then programmers will have to implement it themselves, and it
will *still* be slow.  It makes sense to leave out a feature if it makes
*other* features slower than they would otherwise need to be.

So the question is whether a language can provide extensible scalars
with dispatching calls without slowing code that doesn't need that
power.  I think the answer is yes: don't store the tag with every
object.  Instead, gin it up when calling a class-wide operation.
So "+" on normal (non-class-wide) integers can be a single machine
instruction, and integers can be stored as a single word.  The compiler
can determine when to gin up a tag -- no need for explicit boxing
operations.

- Bob