Re: anonymous access type

["Hibou57 (Yannick Duchêne)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>]

On 5 mar, 16:05, Robert A Duff <bobd...@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
> Do you find it strange that we don't have:
>
>     X : constant Integer := 123;
>     Y : variable Integer := 456; -- Not Ada!
>
> ?
> - Bob

Well done, you've got a clever point indeed.

Perhaps the reason why I did not miss is beceause it does not belong
to the same side. When I see in/out on parameters, I see it from the
external user point of view (e.g. I'm looking at it as a user who
would like make a reference to it), while when I see your exemple, I
see it from the inner point of view (e.g. I'm inside a procedure/
function).

You know what ? I oftenly miss something else : beside of the
formal_parameter_selector_name [ARM2005 6.4/5], I would enjoy in/out
hints at the call statement, just to make invokation instances more
clear when a procedure can modifiy its parameters. It it not always
easy to state it in the procedure's name or in the parameter's name.

But perhaps I'm a bit mad (may be the "explicit" concept is becoming a
kind of hard drug)