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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,799e6e37c90ca633
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: Future Ada language revisions?
Date: 1998/09/27
Message-ID: <1998Sep27.181539.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 395428041
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eisner.decus.org
References: <6um7on$db5$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-Trace: news.decus.org 906934541 25170 KILGALLEN [192.67.173.2]
Organization: LJK Software
Reply-To: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-09-27T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <6um7on$db5$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, bpr5549@my-dejanews.com writes:

> PS: In case anyone is wondering, my main peeve is the restriction on out mode
> function parameters, which I just don't understand, even when I'm trying to
> open minded. I have yet to hear a good defense of this restriction, so if
> anyone has one, I'm all ears, errr, eyes.

On a more pragmatic note, what do you feel has changed about the
world since 1995 to make people change their minds on this issue?
There is no sense wasting resources to debate an issue when those
with a vote have chosen (twice) to let people use procedures rather
than functions to solve this need.

Larry Kilgallen