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 X-Received: by 10.224.59.205 with SMTP id m13mr16993291qah.7.1370370895715; Tue, 04 Jun 2013 11:34:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.49.95.3 with SMTP id dg3mr2113314qeb.41.1370370895660; Tue, 04 Jun 2013 11:34:55 -0700 (PDT) Path: border1.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!ch1no835477qab.0!news-out.google.com!y6ni221qax.0!nntp.google.com!ch1no835473qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 11:34:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <22c9c3a7-b898-40f9-84d1-15332a208569@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 References: <32d94173-533a-471e-95a0-abb73a6cdcc2@googlegroups.com> <51a9e025$0$9521$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <33025e6c-b893-4c66-98f6-0fb469016583@googlegroups.com> <22c9c3a7-b898-40f9-84d1-15332a208569@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <0e22b697-fc91-4cde-94e6-b806359faf0f@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Gnat 2013 is out! From: Adam Beneschan Injection-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 18:34:55 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Original-Bytes: 2065 Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:181796 Date: 2013-06-04T11:34:55-07:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, June 4, 2013 10:42:53 AM UTC-7, Wesley Pan wrote: > > I apologize if this sounds really naive. My Ada skills is quite rusty at the moment (trying to slowly re-learn it). Why not simply make 'dummy' a new keyword? I imagine many people would call their throw away variable something like "Dummy". We already do. That's why we can't make it a new keyword. It would make a ton of existing code illegal. The idea makes sense; too bad they didn't think of it way back in 1983. -- Adam