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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,73cb216d191f0fef
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.68.234.202 with SMTP id ug10mr4046500pbc.6.1363381331115;
        Fri, 15 Mar 2013 14:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 q9ni18659pba.1!nntp.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!news.astraweb.com!border5.a.newsrouter.astraweb.com!newsfeed10.multikabel.net!multikabel.net!newsfeed20.multikabel.net!news.mi.ras.ru!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is this expected behavior or not
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:42:06 +0100
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <8klywqh2pf$.1f949flc1xeia.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <c988e09f-8532-4840-9749-b61aa39551b4@googlegroups.com>
 <wccfw017lkv.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <b9c8e444-4fcc-489f-8101-0a2873807987@googlegroups.com>
 <mtz6eyrgv524.r2yf3jw9vid3$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wccmwu8r0xh.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: pQ928Up2OZ3uIq9RKW9GMg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2013-03-12T18:42:06+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:19:06 -0400, Robert A Duff wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> 
>> The semantics of 'Pred and 'Succ shall be properly defined in terms of
>> convariance of the argument and the result. There are arguments for and
>> against contravariant results. It goes straight to the circle-ellipse
>> controversy.
> 
> The profile of 'Succ is given in RM-3.5(23):
> 
>     function S'Succ (Arg: S'Base) return S'Base;
> 
> It's neither contravariant nor covariant -- it's invariant.

Invariant = contravariant.

>>    for I in Prime'Range loop -- What is this supposed to mean?
>>       ...
> 
> It doesn't mean anything -- it's illegal.

Why Prime'Succ is legal then?

And what about:

   for I in Prime'First..Prime'Last loop

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de