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 10:11:51 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.abs.net!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!spool0900.news.uu.net!reader0900.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
Message-ID: <3C39E520.6030508@mail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 13:12:48 -0500
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
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> <a12il6$gcs$1@bob.news.rcn.net>
 <3C34D252.4070307@mail.com> <5ee5b646.0201040829.18db8001@posting.google.com>
 <3C35E733.6030603@mail.com> <u3bu42jp7h5k0d@corp.supernews.com>
 <3C35FE2A.9020802@mail.com> <u3c2lgenii1m55@corp.supernews.com>
 <3C360E76.3070308@mail.com> <wcpZ7.4393$cD4.8463@www.newsranger.com>
 <3C39C120.1060706@mail.com> <o6KiUwTZOZnU@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <3C39D86C.7030704@mail.com>
 <oTk_7.5343$pE7.1689958569@newssvr30.news.prodigy.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: 1010427107 reader0.ash.ops.us.uu.net 11388 204.253.250.10
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18616
Date: 2002-01-07T13:12:48-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Pat Rogers wrote:

> Well of course "and" is allowed to ignore one of the operands; if the first one
> evaluated is false, there is no need to evaluate the second.  We are just not
> guaranteed which is evaluated first.


You are quite wrong. So much for the claim that experienced Ada
programmers simply learn the difference between "and" and "and then"!
See, for example, 3.8 in the Ada83 Rationale.