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: 103376,90108ed846e3f1bf
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Language lawyer question: task activation
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: 
 <ccf8fc4b-80e3-4732-84e3-16c4e2d10c3d@v39g2000pro.googlegroups.com>
  <1dusr7frk73m7.nlsagplge0hk.dlg@40tude.net>
 <09a7aab3-d105-4a40-b25b-e2824cb12f89@j1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
 <rv6zobw6fror.csu22kh631qi$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <24bdd0df-9554-49de-9c5e-99572c9cdf34@g38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
 <d1d318e7-9cd8-4f28-9cc8-afa3752e711e@g38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
 <1v0f2pkso7p50.vein84avao5t.dlg@40tude.net>
 <499ede41$0$32665$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 19:41:20 +0100
Message-ID: <1lhxmo6l2ypux.bei2ffp1m3e$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Feb 2009 19:41:21 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 8440f3cb.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=7I?\\HA1b@M@k=MdN::NBIic==]BZ:afN4Fo<]lROoRA^YC2XCjHcbICfe5QI_]=OIDNcfSJ;bb[EIRnRBaCd<MN[2g7V=\=]YG3MlMePfme3H
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3722
Date: 2009-02-20T19:41:21+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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