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-Thread: 103376,4cb1f8d1c17d39a8
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.42.155.2 with SMTP id s2mr14003190icw.5.1320345789809;
        Thu, 03 Nov 2011 11:43:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 p6ni67334pbn.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!ircam.fr!freenix!feeder.news.orange.fr!not-for-mail
Message-ID: <4EB2E0BD.6020104@obry.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 19:43:09 +0100
From: Pascal Obry <pascal@obry.net>
Organization: Home - http://www.obry.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; fr-FR;
 rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090605 Thunderbird/2.0.0.22 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
To: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: Ada 'hello world' for Android; success!
References: <8239efcjuw.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <98ca5430-aa52-4e39-b789-70d0dd6adb46@d33g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
 <824nyrq5p6.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <4eac1ca1$0$7625$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <82mxciogt0.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <4eafbc25$0$6575$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <82mxcemscg.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <4eb1e241$0$7627$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <8239e5mo9q.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <wccaa8dp6tg.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
In-Reply-To: <wccaa8dp6tg.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 03 Nov 2011 19:43:09 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.199.32.213
X-Trace: 1320345789 reader.news.orange.fr 18816 83.199.32.213:14063
X-Complaints-To: abuse@orange.fr
Xref: news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18808
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2011-11-03T19:43:09+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le 03/11/2011 16:24, Robert A Duff a �crit :
> I wish the syntax were just "procedure...", leaving off the
> "not null access", which is just noise.

If I can somewhat agree for the "not null access" case it would have 
introduced some irregular syntax as for the "access" case we can have null:

    type P is procedure;
    V : P := null;

Makes quite evident that this is an access no :) So at this point why not:

    type P is access procedure;
    V : P := null;

Which makes things clear, and from there:

    type P is not null access procedure;

Which is consistent with other declarations.

Pascal.

-- 

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|    http://www.obry.net  -  http://v2p.fr.eu.org
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
--|
--| gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-key F949BD3B