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=3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mmintl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!cmcl2!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) Newsgroups: net.lang.ada Subject: Ada errors with => Message-ID: <1124@mmintl.UUCP> Date: Fri, 31-Jan-86 17:02:46 EST Article-I.D.: mmintl.1124 Posted: Fri Jan 31 17:02:46 1986 Date-Received: Thu, 6-Feb-86 05:10:36 EST References: <1613@wanginst.UUCP> Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) Distribution: net Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT List-Id: John Goodenough has noted in his survey that the use of the => operator tends to cause problems for those who are new to Ada. This is accompanied by a perception that it is used differently in different contexts. I believe this perception is incorrect; the use of the symbol is completely uniform. In general, its use in the form => . Why, then, do people have so much trouble with it? (And I had trouble with it, too, when I first encountered it.) The answer, I maintain, is because the symbol looks like an arrow, and that arrow points in the wrong direction. An arrow looks like an assignment, and we assign values to names, not vice versa. Since <= is not available, I think a direction neutral symbol, perhaps ==, would have been a better choice. It is perhaps too late to make this change now; on the other hand, perhaps later versions of the language could support it as an alternative. Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108