Re: Language lawyer question: task activation

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:45:53 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov schrieb:
> 
>>  Function is thought as yielding a value.
> 
> Do you think of a function as yielding
>  "a run-time entity with a given type
>   which can be assigned to an object of
>   an appropriate subtype of the type"?
> (AARM 3.2(10.a))
>
> The thought (idea) of a function yielding a value
> is not obsoleted by build-in-place, I think:
> One interpretation is that the yield of the constructor
> function is an object and the function computes and
> assigns the initial value.

It neither computes nor assigns, because construction/initialization is not
assignment. It is a different thing. The LHS object does not exist prior
construction, but does prior assignment.

> The word "in-place" is not in Ada, only "build-in-place".
> 
> Then, a procedure returns, too. Consequently, a
> function returning yields a value.

What does it return? Note that it does return an object, that were illegal
because the result is limited.

> So I'd guess that thinking of a constructor function
> as yielding a value is still apt. Maybe it is the
> idea of a function in need of an overhaul?

I don't think so. In my view, if an overhaul is needed, then to overcome
the delusion that construction can be expressed by a function. It is bogus.

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