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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,66fae8c862b81b17
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Received: by 10.224.189.16 with SMTP id dc16mr1784828qab.0.1351893785400;
        Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:03:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.19.201 with SMTP id h9mr681220vde.0.1351893785377; Fri, 02
 Nov 2012 15:03:05 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 gf5ni17826425qab.0!nntp.google.com!c7no3794667qap.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 15:03:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <op.wm48fcpwule2fv@cardamome>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=77.65.97.192;
 posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S
NNTP-Posting-Host: 77.65.97.192
References: <1aWdnbcg_8-BzAzNnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <k6rk3m$fu6$1@dont-email.me>
 <559eb706-9bb1-496d-9034-1984d693531a@googlegroups.com>
 <op.wm48fcpwule2fv@cardamome>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5460fdc7-5490-4889-b771-67cc281c10c5@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Copy vector in Ada
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 22:03:05 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-11-02T15:03:05-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

W dniu pi=C4=85tek, 2 listopada 2012 12:20:04 UTC+1 u=C5=BCytkownik Hibou57=
 (Yannick Duch=C3=AAne) napisa=C5=82:

> Ada is not C/C++, if the assignment operator is available in a type =20
> interface, that means it is safe to use.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The rules and their implications are pr=
etty similar in Ada and in C++.
In other words, if you have an example of unsafe C++ code (that is, unsafe =
in relation to the assignment operator), I think there should be an equival=
ent example in Ada as well.

> When the assignment operator =20
> would not be safe to use and/or would cost too much to the implementation=
 =20
> to be made available safely, then Ada has well know way to exclude it fro=
m =20
> the interface: =E2=80=9Climited type=E2=80=9D.

Similarly in C++ - if the assignment operator is too costly (or just imposs=
ible) to implement, there is a way to ban it.

> So, yes, if =E2=80=9C:=3D=E2=80=9D is available in the interface, that me=
ans it's not a hack =20
> to use it.

Unless the author of the type forgot to implement it properly?

--=20
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.msobczak.com * http://www.inspirel.com