"Stephen Leake" <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov> a �crit dans le message news: u8zqe5klh.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov...
> Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> writes:
>
> > <snip explanation of type conversion on OUT parameter>
> >
> > It's really there to provide an easy explanation for what
> > happens in the case of derived types. I think it's actually
> > misguided, because although it makes the explanation of derived
> > types easier, it introduces a bogus misleading feature into the
> > language that is of very little practical use and which causes a
> > lot of confusion, even among people who know Ada well!
>
> I think that's a bit strong. I've had occasion to use type conversion
> on out parameters, without using derived types (no examples readily at
> hand, or at least they are hard to find). I should think needing to
> convert an out parameter would happen about as often as needing to
> convert an in parameter, or a function result. The syntax may seem a
> little backwards, but if you think of it as "convert this object as
> needed to match the subprogram specification" it makes more sense.
>
Typical example is if you define:
type My_String is array (My_integer_type range <>) of character;

It is nice to be able to use Get_Line...

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (Rosen.Adalog@wanadoo.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog