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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3b4bed4f74b8ac49
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Dr. Peter E. Obermayer" <obermaye@cci.de>
Subject: Re: GNAT messages and the not operator (pitfall alert!)
Date: 1996/10/30
Message-ID: <3277C5F1.3F4E@cci.de>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 193514889
distribution: world
references: <dewar.846163972@merv> <54snn6$8j5@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: Competence Center Informatik GmbH
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
Date: 1996-10-30T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


John Herro wrote:

-- Discussion on parntheses deleted

> I'm not saying that the code
> 
>    if X**2 + 3.0*X + 2.0 < 100.0 then ...

Better (X + 3.0)*X + 2.0 < 100.0

> 
> should be cluttered with unnecessary parentheses.  Everyone knows that
> "**" comes before "*" and "/", which come before binary "+" and "-", and
> everyone knows that the relational operators have a low precedence.  It's
> also arguable that "everyone" knows that "and" comes before "or".  But I'd
> say in almost every other case, unless the order of evaluation is very
> obvious, use parentheses!
> 
> Even Ada has some pitfalls.  If everyone followed this rule, one of them
> would be no problem.
> 
> - John Herro
> Software Innovations Technology
> http://members.aol.com/AdaTutor
> ftp://members.aol.com/AdaTutor


Peter E. Obermayer

   _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Dr. Peter E. Obermayer 
  _/     _/       _/                           Tel.:   xx49(5931)805-469
 _/     _/       _/     Lohberg 10             Fax:    xx49(5931)842-469
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/    D-49716 Meppen         e-mail: obermayer@cci.de