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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,38fc011071df5a27 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-16 13:15:51 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news-hub.cableinet.net!blueyonder!internal-news-hub.cableinet.net!news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418 Subject: Re: Ideas for Ada 200X From: Bill Findlay Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Message-ID: References: <3EE7CC70.E1FD3A67@adaworks.com> <3EECA772.4B662024@adaworks.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 21:14:38 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.195.75.181 X-Complaints-To: abuse@blueyonder.co.uk X-Trace: news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk 1055794548 80.195.75.181 (Mon, 16 Jun 2003 20:15:48 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 20:15:48 GMT Organization: blueyonder (post doesn't reflect views of blueyonder) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39271 Date: 2003-06-16T21:14:38+01:00 List-Id: On 16/6/03 20:09, in article bcl4o8$kkj68$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de, "Vinzent Hoefler" wrote: > Bill Findlay wrote: >> All the proposals so far have their problems: >> >> idem (or any new reserved word) but: a new reserved word >> all but: could be a typo for "p.all" >> <> but: consider "<> < <>+1" > > Mmh. Well, this sure looks ugly, but its actual use isn't so obvious > to me. I mean, we are talking about some kind of assignment here, > aren't we? So how would come someone up with something like this: > > |x := <> < <> + 1; > > On the first glance I can't find any idea where this makes sense. The > result type should fit (so it should be boolean, I'd say) unless > someone has made use of a quite strange overloading of the > "<"-Operator... > > What am I missing here? Overloading is one possibility, but this expression is feasible as a *sub*expression of a valid RHS, e.g. X := Boolean'Pos(<> < <> + 1); -- see how flexible idem notation is? 8-) -- Bill-Findlay chez blue-yonder.co.uk ("-" => "")