TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
Date:
Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:01:14 -0500
Reply-To:
Samuel Mize <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Samuel Mize <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]> from "Matthew Heaney" at Oct 14, 98 09:24:46 pm
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
MIME-Version:
1.0
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (36 lines)
Matthew Heaney wrote:
> > A pragma like "pragma Overrides(...)" would seem to be a good thing
> > to have here.  This should go on the "list" of useful pragmas for
> > vendors to agree on...
> >
> > -Tuck
>
> Just out of curiosity: Why wasn't this included as a feature of the
> language to begin with?  And why a pragma instead of a keyword (as I
> suggested in my earlier post)?

(I'm not Tuck, but I'll answer.)

Because a vendor can add a pragma.  You can't alter the actual
language and still have Ada.

If vendors start providing this, and people find it useful, that
would be a good argument for working the concept into the next
language revision.

I assume we would want that to be upwardly compatible, so the
"override" keyword might be optional, but cause a compilation
failure if the subprogram does not override a dispatching
subprogram.

As for why it wasn't included in Ada95 to begin with, I suspect it
wasn't thought up in time, since other OO languages don't have
this feature either.

Best,
Sam Mize

--
Samuel Mize -- [log in to unmask] (home email) -- Team Ada
Fight Spam: see http://www.cauce.org/ \\\ Smert Spamonam

ATOM RSS1 RSS2