Re: gnoga build fails on Mac

["Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>]

On 7/3/20 2:23 AM, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> A body is always freezing; an expression function is freezing if it is a
> completion. So that would suggest that this particular case should be legal.

Thanks. So now all 3 of us who have looked at this code agree on that.

> About the only time it makes sense to declare a type
> in a procedure like this is to write simple test/example programs - which
> necessarily makes those tests/examples less realistic than they should be.

Or when, as here, the functionality is provided by a generic, and one only needs 
a simple main-program procedure to instantiate it.

> If  I was designing a simpler Ada-like language, I'd completely ban
> declaring types outside of packages, so that the rules for primitive
> operations and overriding would be the same for all types. (I'd also ban
> declaring packages that aren't at library level, which would get rid of the
> majority of accessibility checking and similar nonsense.) The only time
> anyone would miss it would be when writing simple test programs. Not a huge
> loss.

An interesting idea, and certainly a simplification. I would like to see more 
about your language design.

I have been thinking recently about what it would be like to have something like 
package types, to extend the package-as-object concept to things that can be 
declared and passed. My simplifications would be to eliminate type extension and 
accessibility checking and similar nonsense.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"I'm a kike, a yid, a heebie, a hook nose! I'm Kosher,
Mum! I'm a Red Sea pedestrian, and proud of it!"
Monty Python's Life of Brian
77