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: 103376,76ec5d55630beb71 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-02 08:20:03 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.telebyte.nl!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!kibo.news.demon.net!demon!mephistopheles.news.clara.net!news.clara.net!news-hub.cableinet.net!blueyonder!internal-news-hub.cableinet.net!news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418 Subject: Re: Ada 200X From: Bill Findlay Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Message-ID: References: <3EDAD07A.3010200@attbi.com> <1054562949.551399@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1054565992.652258@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 16:18:57 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.195.75.181 X-Complaints-To: abuse@blueyonder.co.uk X-Trace: news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk 1054567202 80.195.75.181 (Mon, 02 Jun 2003 15:20:02 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 15:20:02 GMT Organization: blueyonder (post doesn't reflect views of blueyonder) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38364 Date: 2003-06-02T16:18:57+01:00 List-Id: On 2/6/03 16:04, in article bbfp40$90vu6$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de, "Vinzent Hoefler" wrote: > Hyman Rosen wrote: > >> Vinzent Hoefler wrote: >>> Yes, but who is the ancestor? You always have to look for that. >> >> That's fine. > > Yes, it works. :) > >> I'm given to understand that Ada is meant to be >> for the convenience of the reader, not the writer. It may be >> more work for you to look up the ancestor, but then the reader >> of the code will know exactly where to look for the code. > > Yes, it's ok for the first time you have to write it. > The problem sometimes is that all these view conversions should be > changed when you make a change to the object hierarchy and insert > another object, Might you not want to invoke the original parent in some cases, and in other cases the newly-interposed parent? It seems that is an issue calling for at least a careful review of all the types in that lineage, during which such hand-offs should be reconsidered, rather than just taking it for granted that the default given by 'super' is the right one. > so that the former father is now suddenly the > grandfather. Because in the way the view conversion works, this is > legal, but it might be wrong. YMMV. -- Bill-Findlay chez blue-yonder.co.uk ("-" => "")