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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED.3d73Ybk3C5U4I2t8lv+lAQ.user.gioia.aioe.org!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Type naming conventions: Any_Foo Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2019 12:21:38 +0100 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 3d73Ybk3C5U4I2t8lv+lAQ.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 Content-Language: en-US X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2 Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:57686 Date: 2019-12-07T12:21:38+01:00 List-Id: On 2019-12-07 11:13, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote: > On 12/6/19 9:35 PM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: >> >> No, it would be misleading. Element must be reserved for instances of >> the type. They are actual elements. The type of an element is not an >> element, these are two totally different things. > > As these are generic data structures, there are no instances of the > type. Each type has instances = objects of. > Parameters should be called Item (the library commonly uses > New_Item). That is a poor choice of names. What is the difference or connection between Element and Item. How the type of Item is Element? Why not otherwise? To me the pair Element_Type-Element is cleaner than Element-Item. [ Element and item are just same thing. Element is a member of a set. Item is a member of a set too, though the set is usually ordered. ] >> I am required to. There must be always be two types in a GUI, one >> referential type and one implementation type. > > As I have presented here in the past a proof of concept of a GUI library > that uses no access types, this is demonstrably false. Yes, I remember you did, but I also remember that it was not really usable. The fact is that widgets have referential semantics because they are not computational objects, they live in the outer world like all I/O objects, e.g. File_Type (Note "_Type" (:-)). You cannot get around that. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de