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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,75a8a3664688f227 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-13 22:04:04 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3A6140CB.63EE9B8F@acm.org> From: Jeffrey Carter X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Parameter Modes, In In Out and Out References: <3A57CD7F.2228BFD5@brighton.ac.uk> <938p3u$omv$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93cagm$c1j$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93e4e6$ucg$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93encq$brm$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93f6ar$m44$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93flab$2mh$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93fqau$6m2$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93h9mo$bbm$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93il87$iqo$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93k6dv$qt6$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93ko49$auq$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93modu$36k$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93n2co$alq$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93q39q$oq0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93q6cd$r3k$1@nnrp1.deja.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 06:02:04 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.121.225.25 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net 979452124 165.121.225.25 (Sat, 13 Jan 2001 22:02:04 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 22:02:04 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3994 Date: 2001-01-14T06:02:04+00:00 List-Id: Brian Rogoff wrote: > > I also think that some form of downward funarg would be a lot more useful > in day-to-day programming than multimethods, though I guess I wouldn't > call Ada crippled or hobbled. I'd just say that it's an annoyance that I > wish wasn't there. (Sorry, couldn't resist :) There is a basic consistency issue here. Ada does things safely by default, but always allows the developer to get around the rules when appropriate by using something named Unchecked_XXX. In the area of access-to-object values, this is 'Unchecked_Access. However, in the area of passing an access-to-subprogram value to a subprogram, there is no way to get around the rules. This is an unfortunate deviation from the basic philosophy. -- Jeff Carter "Monsieur Arthur King, who has the brain of a duck, you know." Monty Python & the Holy Grail