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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!l38g2000vba.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hibou57_=28Yannick_Duch=EAne=29?=
 <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: anonymous access type
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 00:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <01fc8d33-ebe0-4104-a817-60e1dc6142e3@l38g2000vba.googlegroups.com>
References: <d1fb109a-13d6-4884-9e71-304a58c46e62@w9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
	<wcck574x2r7.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 79.91.74.78
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1236242327 10289 127.0.0.1 (5 Mar 2009 08:38:47
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:38:47 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: l38g2000vba.googlegroups.com; posting-host=79.91.74.78;
	posting-account=vrfdLAoAAAAauX_3XwyXEwXCWN3A1l8D
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1;
	fr),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4932
Date: 2009-03-05T00:38:47-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 5 mar, 00:54, Robert A Duff <bobd...@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
>
> It's really a (minor) language design flaw that "in" is allowed but
> not required. =A0It should be either required or forbidden. =A0(I would
> prefer forbidden.) =A0As it is, the Ada language has split into three
> dialects: always say 'in', never say 'in', and say 'in' only for
> procedures. =A0That's unfortunate.
>
> - Bob
If it ever becomes forbidden, this would brake too much application
sources around the world. There is no chancge it would occurs.

Then, as long as "in out" makes sens beside of "out", then "in" do as
well (would seems strange if there was "in out", "out" and no "in").

As the latter one, I'm of the ones who prefer to always write "in".