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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.129.9 with SMTP id ns9mr4021047pbb.1.1335392289385;
        Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:18:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 r9ni98369pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:18:04 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X?
References: 
 <17572718.3572.1335384748259.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfk16>
 <jn9mpp$3pf$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
 <2067477840357081057.394792martin-re.mo.ve.thedowies.com@news.btinternet.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <2067477840357081057.394792martin-re.mo.ve.thedowies.com@news.btinternet.com>
Message-ID: <4f98781c$0$6557$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Apr 2012 00:18:04 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 49c85767.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=EQ>]lkZDl8:85[]]\]T0814IUK<Cl32<14Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;hn@@Y2U:<l>PCY\c7>ejV8mH1IV7EQHS<_mfEOT`P3@=
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-04-26T00:18:04+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 25.04.12 23:11, Martin Dowie wrote:
> Jeffrey Carter<spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>  wrote:
>> On 04/25/2012 01:12 PM, okellogg@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
>>>
>>>         continue when Another_Condition;
>>
>> That reminds me:
>>
>> return [expression] [when condition];
>> raise [exception-name [with String-expression]] [when condition];
>
> +1
>
> Syntactic sugar but nice...

Dentists, rejoice!

N := 5;
return 10 * N + Func (N) when Proc_in_out (N) > 5;

    case N is
       when 1 =>
          return 0 when N > 3;
       when 2 =>
          ...
    end case;

    case Boolean'(V) is
       when True =>
          return X when X = True;
       when False =>
          return When True;
    end case;

Also, imagine a few line breaks that Perl programmers would write.
They have return [expression] [if expression] and write

   $foo = something($bar);
   return $foo + frobnicte($bar + $something)  # No ';' here!
   if $bar > 0;
   continuing();

This all becomes very dependent on single ';'s. You can see it when you
feed the above future Ada text to Ada compilers :-)