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: a07f3367d7,ab1d177a5a26577d
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!uucp.gnuu.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:37:46 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110123 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What's wrong with C++?
References: 
 <104cfd9f-dbf5-4f05-9c4a-a2319dd371a9@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>
 <alpine.WNT.2.00.1102161829430.1328@WHIRLWIND>
 <ijivb2$b60$1@news.eternal-september.org>
 <4d5d0c16$0$6972$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <op.vq2faprkule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <4d5da74d$0$7662$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <op.vq2wd00aule2fv@douda-yannick>
In-Reply-To: <op.vq2wd00aule2fv@douda-yannick>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <4d5e3dea$0$6890$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Feb 2011 10:37:46 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 8ff25998.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=B\BDAR5n;\_mG86`U=_nC_A9EHlD;3YcR4Fo<]lROoRQ8kF<OcfhCO[jEo4O1HdoV[PCY\c7>ejVXIdnKl\<j4<_UUU_AE6l5>W
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17413
Date: 2011-02-18T10:37:46+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2/18/11 4:09 AM, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote:
> Le Thu, 17 Feb 2011 23:55:09 +0100, Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de> a écrit:
>
>> On 2/17/11 10:00 PM, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote:
>>
>>>> Make "+" a little more obscure (if possible) and have
>>>> a proponent of Ada look for the error...
>>>
>>> Here, Ada 2012's pre-post-conditions comes in the playground ;)
>>
>> Not really. Which "+" is it that the post-condition is mentioning?
>
> Should be the mathematical one.

Which one?