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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!hubcap!billwolf
From: billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Procedure types and dynamic binding
Message-ID: <4088@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: 15 Jan 89 18:28:53 GMT
References: <1089@shuksan.UUCP>
Sender: news@hubcap.UUCP
Reply-To: billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>From article <1089@shuksan.UUCP>, by scott@shuksan.UUCP (Scott Moody):
> I for one wouldn't mind procedure parameters and varaiables, 
> ala C, but I can see that they go against the non goto rational behind Ada.

   Speaking of the non-goto rationale behind Ada, can anyone tell me
   why Ada has a goto statement??  (See LRM 5.9...)  The Rationale for 
   the Design of Ada conveniently fails to discuss it.


                                          Bill Wolfe

                                   wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu