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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bu.edu!inmet!stt
From: stt@inmet.inmet.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: procedural variables
Message-ID: <20600083@inmet>
Date: 14 Feb 91 19:08:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:<9102110959.aa23851@PARIS.ICS.UC:-38:inmet:20600083:000:703
Nf-From: inmet.inmet.com!stt    Feb 14 14:08:00 1991
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Re: procedural variables

The Ada 9X Requirements document, dated December 1990,
includes a Study Topic and a Requirement dealing with
subprograms as variables/parameters.  This indicates
that there is now general consensus that such a capability
should be in the upcoming revision of Ada.

As for why there were left out originally, yes
it was probably that generics provide partial support, and also
I think there were some concerns about safety.

For Ada 9X, we believe we will be able to provide both a safe and
flexible capability for subprograms as variables/parameters.

Stay tuned...

S. Tucker Taft      stt@inmet.inmet.com
Ada 9X Mapping/Revision Team
Intermetrics, Inc.
Cambridge, MA  02138