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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,782af4edeb84c4b7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: basic basic ada question
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <1161268231.345231.242170@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
 <4537bc65_1@newsfeed.slurp.net> <nvqr0vqdz1mq.1dpuggak87pcq$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <eha0mc$gsg$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <5567b72ia0c9$.1b6yl0tpfscj5$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wcc4ptzknxl.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 19:37:35 +0200
Message-ID: <1flkwck0owa40$.1i0gptgxircuo$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Oct 2006 19:37:19 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71cc985b.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=;Vm;3k44QXiEB;5>eE0T7mic==]BZ:afn4Fo<]lROoRa^YC2XCjHcbiZmB@e?7ZOCeDNcfSJ;bb[eIRnRBaCd<MnU=JRbCFO>>o6CE?YoTC5Dc
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7089
Date: 2006-10-20T19:37:19+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:27:18 -0400, Robert A Duff wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> 
>> Exactly! Because wether Argument (I) is a function call, array indexing,
>> conversion, that is an implementation detail for the reader.
> 
> That argument would be more convincing if arrays and functions had the
> same semantics.  E.g., "X := F(Y);" can have side effects if F is a
> function, but not if F is an array.  And "F(Z) := ..." might or might
> not make sense.

Yes, but if Ada provided abstract array interfaces then arrays and
functions would be fully symmetric.

I find it pitiful that Ada has no guts  to support

   Container (Key) := Element;

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de