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,c7d533acec91ae16 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Al Christians Subject: Re: Question for the folks who designed Ada95 Date: 1999/04/27 Message-ID: <3726039A.916FC0F3@easystreet.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 471564491 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <7g2qu4$ca4$1@usenet.rational.com> <7g3b5g$p92$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7g4ae3$hjh2@ftp.kvaerner.com> <7g4gjk$luq@drn.newsguy.com> <7g4n1q$vag$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: news14.ispnews.com 925238144 206.103.35.114 (Tue, 27 Apr 1999 14:35:44 EDT) Organization: Trillium Resources Corporation MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 14:35:44 EDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-04-27T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > > > What *is* important is that this issue has been discussed > at length, in both 83 and 95, and every discussion made it > clear that the constituency that hates the null parens is > (a) in the clear majority and (b) feels strongly about it. > > To suggest making such a change at this stage is out of > the question. It would be a horrendous incompatibility that > would annoy the majority of Ada users! > Couldn't the ()'s for a 0-parameter call be optional for clarity for those who think they enhance clarity? Al