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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.107.200.129 with SMTP id y123mr8594833iof.103.1502413372952;
        Thu, 10 Aug 2017 18:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.36.107.3 with SMTP id v3mr617435itc.2.1502413372922; Thu, 10
 Aug 2017 18:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!paganini.bofh.team!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!u14no104572ita.0!news-out.google.com!1ni156itx.0!nntp.google.com!u14no104563ita.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 18:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <omi4tu$1647$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=2a02:c7d:3c35:b000:325a:3aff:fe0f:37a5;
 posting-account=L2-UcQkAAAAfd_BqbeNHs3XeM0jTXloS
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a02:c7d:3c35:b000:325a:3aff:fe0f:37a5
References: <oludae$seh$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
 <79e06550-67d7-45b3-88f8-b7b3980ecb20@googlegroups.com>
 <9d4bc8aa-cc44-4c30-8385-af0d29d49b36@googlegroups.com>
 <1395655516.524005222.638450.laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org>
 <1502382504.2184.6.camel@obry.net> <omi2vs$12q7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <1040032843.524077622.950797.laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org>
 <omi4tu$1647$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <183e2377-26b9-436f-830f-ba2021d455f6@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Community Input for the Maintenance and Revision of the Ada
 Programming Language
From: Lucretia <laguest9000@googlemail.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 01:02:52 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:47690
Date: 2017-08-10T18:02:52-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thursday, 10 August 2017 18:25:30 UTC+1, Dmitry A. Kazakov  wrote:

> >> Should not they be named? Then it is an anonymous record type:
> >>
> >>     function Blah return
> >>        record Count : Integer; Value : Float end record;

No, I would prefer notation for tuples, say <> or [] as they have no use in Ada, or just use () like we do for everything else. In the compiler, it could just generate records.

   function Blah return <Count : Integer; Value: Float>;

then you could pass Blah to function which took as input (only) a tuple which matched.

   procedure Do_Thing (Tuple : in <Integer, Float>);

   Do_Thing (Blah);

   Tuple : <Count : Integer; Value: Float> := Blah;

or:

   Count : Integer;
   Value : Float;

   Count, Value := Blah;


> I doubt any number of generics would help.

No, it would lead to an explosion of generics, that's why I said it wasn't ideal.
 
> The question is syntax of passing tuple result down. If resolved it 
> could help in other important cases like container element in-place 
> update when you want to pass the container's element down in in-out mode.

If you allowed named tuples, as in above "Tuple" you could pass out as well. Each element could be accessed as Tuple.Count and Tuple.Value.

Luke.