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=1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d46d23ef29cdbd30
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com>
Subject: Re: newbie question
Date: 1999/03/20
Message-ID: <7cv0ns$dvk$3@plug.news.pipex.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 456749719
References: <36F039F8.275E7145@hknet.com> <7cti23$ad2@top.mitre.org>
 <7cucck$jdp$2@plug.news.pipex.net>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET
 WorldCom)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-03-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I got my tongue in a twist when I said

|The 'is <>' at the end of the procedure and function generic parameters
|allow an instantiation of the generic procedure (My_Sort) to be omitted, if
|there is a suitable procedure or function already in existence which has
the
|same name ('Swap' or the operator "<=").  A lot of types already have "<="
|defined for them (the predefined types Integer, Float, and String, for
|example).


The correct version would be:

>>> The 'is <>' at the end of the procedure and function generic parameters
allow an actual function or procedure to be omitted from an instantiation of
the generic procedure (My_Sort) , if there is a suitable procedure or
function already in existence which has the same name ('Swap' or the
operator "<=").  A lot of types already have "<=" defined for them (the
predefined types Integer, Float, and String, for example). <<<

If you listen very closely, you can actually hear the synapses in my brain
clicking.

(Occasionally :-)

-------------------------------------
Nick Roberts
-------------------------------------