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=2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a00006d3c4735d70
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-10 09:49:48 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!rcn!feed3.news.rcn.net!not-for-mail
Reply-To: "Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com>
From: "Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <1731094.1f7Irsyk1h@linux1.krischik.com>
 <3ff1b8ef.614528516@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <3FF1E06D.A351CCB4@yahoo.com>
 <3ff20cc8.635997032@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <bsumbs$k9e$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <3ff9df16.30249104@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <1665674.ZrTUW4qaQq@linux1.krischik.com>
 <1073409810.463948@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <NbDKb.505$9b5.388@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>
 <1073421950.964139@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <E7aLb.776788$Tr4.2231457@attbi_s03>
 <3ffd9d14.1526346@News.CIS.DFN.DE>
 <btlmj0$8o9lq$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <1073659951.261166@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <btoqj7$9qtre$1@ID-77047.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <3ffff826$0$6755$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>
 <2255889.jXjmIm6Msp@linux1.krischik.com>
Subject: Re: Certified C compilers for safety-critical embedded systems
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 12:49:47 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <40003b3b$0$6755$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.176.101
X-Trace: 1073756987 reader3.news.rcn.net 6755 209.6.176.101:3582
X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4312
Date: 2004-01-10T12:49:47-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Martin Krischik" <krischik@users.sourceforge.net> wrote in message
news:2255889.jXjmIm6Msp@linux1.krischik.com...
> Frank J. Lhota wrote:
> > That is why I think that Ada 0y should include a "()" operator, so that
we
> > would have an abstract array capability, as well as an abstract function
> > capability.
>
> Of course it would only be usefull in combination with some form ".."
> operator. Otherwise one could not transparently create abstract array.
>
> However I imagine that a ".." operator might my very difficult to define.

A further discussion of the "()" operator would be more than welcome, but
let us first review an earlier thread on this topic in this NG, archived
here:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&threadm=1ec946d1.0306090615.a9870ff%40posting.google.com&rnum=38&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DLhota%2B%2522():%253D%2522%2Bgroup:comp.lang.ada%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dcomp.lang.ada%26safe%3Doff%26start%3D30%26sa%3DN

In this thread, I also proposed an "():=" operator for updating a component
of an abstract array.