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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: operation can be dispatching in only one type
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 09:37:10 +0100
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <wkw9b1sq4mg0.14cvqyjh3bit8.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <b4aee46c-7dbb-4906-99c5-f4f8e9876fc6@googlegroups.com>
 <n2viun$sb0$1@dont-email.me>
 <04eb6626-644b-4b16-a329-c35659a9fbe2@googlegroups.com>
 <n325f8$kq0$1@dont-email.me> <dbjve4F188rU1@mid.individual.net>
 <n32lqq$sqm$1@dont-email.me> <1ephv5ugr5mib$.9ehadf3dddct$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <c3827fcd-6b2e-4c64-8901-1e91030f1c84@googlegroups.com>
 <1nf8wc05tjtvf$.1ctjb9hsr0qsp.dlg@40tude.net>
 <8132c558-aec2-41f4-8024-4a75a2d497ae@googlegroups.com>
 <17c8a7kqoxvff.aa1raqev6xlu$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <75a4c7be-391d-4e5d-9e6e-23607132c943@googlegroups.com>
 <n377k1$36j$1@dont-email.me>
 <343b78d1-c1ba-40d3-af80-e18de45f2e3d@googlegroups.com>
 <n37sup$s1k$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: p9a8jKAGz0rpkSSbWxF1gQ.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:28555
Date: 2015-11-27T09:37:10+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:20:41 +0100, J-P. Rosen wrote:

> Le 26/11/2015 19:27, Serge Robyns a écrit :
>> Isn't the purpose of higher programming languages not to save
>> keystrokes, simplifying abstractions, enabling more powerful
>> algorithms to be expressed directly?
> Sure, but here the proposal is to offer the same functionality, with a
> different syntax. It may be more pleasant, but it's not higher level.

It is higher level because it introduces an abstract record interface. It
also supports separation of interface and implementation which built-in
record types fail to provide. And it would make the language type system
more regular. Usual claims of separation OO language parts from non-OO
parts is nonsense. There is no such thing, but reasonably designed types
and compiler-magic assisted kludges.

> That's what is called syntactic sugar. (Sugar is pleasant, isn't it? But
> not in my coffee, no thanks ;-) )

Why do you use record types at all? It surely is just sugar dust put on a
memory chunk. You certainly could declare Get and Set operations to extract
and set members at the specified memory offsets. No?

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de