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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7ecb950fc3673a68 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Matt" Subject: Re: Ada Query... Date: 2000/03/26 Message-ID: <8blgui$d46$1@plutonium.btinternet.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 602627320 References: <8bkv48$dcm$1@uranium.btinternet.com> <8bl19p$381$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Priority: 3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Organization: BT Internet X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-03-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: I am not using any book at the moment...I can't find it! I don't want the procedure at the top of the main program, mainly because it's huge and I don't want the program to be too congested, and also other people in the team may wish to use it in their section of code. So to put a finer point on it, I want this code outside the 'main' program, that can be accessed by the 'main' program and other functions etc. I can write a package including this source code, but (?) does a package have to consist of functions? Can the package spec and body contain procedures, just like as if I wrote the code at the top of the main program? (Because i want to call it this way). There is already a package in the 'main' program (PROCEDURE Load IS etc ect..), and I implement it by simply calling the phrase Load; anywhere in my program. I want the same sort of thing from this 'search' part of the code, to call it using a phrase like Search; anywhere in the source code. The trouble is, unlike the Load procedure, i want the definition and body of this sub-program elsewhere, and want to call it in my program and a few others. Can this be done? Regards, Matt. Robert Dewar wrote in message news:8bl19p$381$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article <8bkv48$dcm$1@uranium.btinternet.com>, > "Matt" wrote: > > Yo. > > Having a bit of trouble with Ada95 at the moment. > > What i want to know is- can you write a function that returns > no result > > This is so fundamental, that one has to ask what source > materials you are using. You need a reasonable Ada text book > if you are going to try to program in Ada 95, trying to do > it by rough approximation and reading examples is unlikely > to work. Absolutely any text book will introduce procedures > almost immediately, so that's why I ask the question. > > Incidentally the idea of a "function returning no result" is > a bit like a car without a wheel, the notion of returning > a result is what makes a function a function! > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.