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: 103376,88e7ef9008757431 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Geoff Bull Subject: Re: Function Calls by Address Date: 1999/09/05 Message-ID: <37D2744B.F7278D6D@acenet.com.au>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 521308816 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <37CADE68.6AF06F5D@escmail.orl.lmco.com> <37CEEFFA.7D73F78D@magic.fr> <7qooh7$hbh$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <37CFFEA6.921CBE59@magic.fr> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@telstra.net X-Trace: nsw.nnrp.telstra.net 936539173 203.35.118.1 (Sun, 05 Sep 1999 23:46:13 EST) Organization: Customer of Telstra Big Pond Direct MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 05 Sep 1999 23:46:13 EST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-09-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Francois Godme wrote: > Yes, it will not work everywhere and not for nested procedures. > > I knew about the nested procedures restriction but thought that no one > still uses nested procedures. Personally, I have stopped using them. Why > will I hide a perfectly useful procedure inside another when all I want > is to spare me rewriting over and over the same thing. I have been writing a lot of Java, and I really miss nested procedures. I find there are places where nested procedures are simply the natural thing to do.