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=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ace3fca092a457cd
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder3.cambrium.nl!feeder2.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.201.147.87.MISMATCH!news.astraweb.com!border2.a.newsrouter.astraweb.com!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!newsfeed01.chello.at!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Unary operator after binary operator: legal or not? =>
	Compiler Error
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.tsoh+bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
In-Reply-To: <wccy7gwa7sh.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <KYtri.46105$Fc.35820@attbi_s21>
	 <h%Bri.384485$p47.369566@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
	 <KdCri.384503$p47.38112@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
	 <wccbqdsk40u.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
	 <x5gt38t82erv.18bpz9z12rz3q.dlg@40tude.net>
	 <wccy7gwa7sh.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1185901323.18398.4.camel@kartoffel>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:02:03 +0200
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 31 Jul 2007 19:01:23 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 0edf00f1.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=55jdd4YEPbjj5k5aEF7ISm4IUK<Cl32<a4Fo<]lROoRa^YC2XCjHcbiX6Qj\ka\]5b=kbmW`a1fGgC`2T@AUZfCk5MB\TQ`CK`j
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:1293
Date: 2007-07-31T19:01:23+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 11:53 -0400, Robert A Duff wrote:

> But don't you think:
> 
>     X * -3
> 
> ought to be legal (no user-defined operators in sight)?

You'r kidding, aren't you? Next thing would be

   X *- 3;

Or, can't we have X + -3, please?

Why is --3 not positive? I get a strange compiler error.

  --Georg