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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,25aa3c7e1b59f7b5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-01-07 09:17:38 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!skynet.be!skynet.be!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!news2.euro.net!uunet!ash.uu.net!spool0900.news.uu.net!reader0902.news.uu.net!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3C39D86C.7030704@mail.com> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 12:18:36 -0500 From: Hyman Rosen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:0.9.7+) Gecko/20010929 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: A case where Ada defaults to unsafe? References: <3C34BF2C.6030500@mail.com> <3C34D252.4070307@mail.com> <5ee5b646.0201040829.18db8001@posting.google.com> <3C35E733.6030603@mail.com> <3C35FE2A.9020802@mail.com> <3C360E76.3070308@mail.com> <3C39C120.1060706@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: KBC Financial Products Cache-Post-Path: master.nyc.kbcfp.com!unknown@mosquito.nyc.kbcfp.com X-Cache: nntpcache 2.3.3 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/) NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.253.250.10 X-Trace: 1010423855 reader2.ash.ops.us.uu.net 526 204.253.250.10 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18612 Date: 2002-01-07T12:18:36-05:00 List-Id: Larry Kilgallen wrote: > What is dubious about optimizing: > if my_function (arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4) and not suppression_mode > then > where suppression_mode is a boolean variable ? What is it you're asking me here? In this case Ada requires that my_function is called, regardless of the value of suppression_mode, so what optimization do you have in mind? Remember, "and" is required to evaluate both operands. You seem to think that "and" is allowed to short-circuit one of the operands.