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-Thread: a07f3367d7,cb04cee6116c8ced X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news1.google.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!198.186.194.249.MISMATCH!transit3.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news-out.readnews.com!transit4.readnews.com!panix!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Package's private parts and protected types Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 10:17:16 -0500 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Message-ID: References: <7ff3810f-3ee3-4f39-a54c-933ad7d0655c@36g2000yqu.googlegroups.com> <1v2la97s2yyvd.1rcy0ana8mver.dlg@40tude.net> <3bb38996-47f7-4f30-8255-f011501404b5@b10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <1qttzk1jbh24i$.xid2h7me3oec.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: pcls6.std.com 1265642217 25205 192.74.137.71 (8 Feb 2010 15:16:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 15:16:57 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ebcNHaqXUEy+wZcInw5R3/RP+B4= Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8981 Date: 2010-02-08T10:17:16-05:00 List-Id: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" writes: > Yes, OK. Maybe it is not so offending as private components of a protected > type, but you are right. "C++-ish" notation (wasn't it actually before > C++?) poison is at work here as well. According to this: http://research.scee.net/files/presentations/gcapaustralia09/Pitfalls_of_Object_Oriented_Programming_GCAP_09.pdf C++ development started in 1979, and was named "C++" in 1983. Ada development started in the late 70's (not sure exactly, probably before 1979), and was named "Ada" before 1983. So I think Ada slightly predates C++. It also says C++ was standardized in 1998. Is that right? I'm surprised it was so late... Ada was first standardized in 1983. IIRC, Ada 83 tasks did not have private parts, and protected types did not exist. Packages had private parts. They were a mistake, IMHO. But I don't think it's fair to blame Bjarne Stroustrup for this mistake. ;-) - Bob