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-Thread: 103376,d00514eb0749375b
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "(see below)" <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: initialize an array (1-D) at elaboration using an expression
 based on the index?
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 23:47:37 +0100
Message-ID: <C8F3B099.1536CC%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
References: <i9amkr$goj$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <1f6bad81-e3d2-428b-a1a0-45acc7f96f68@m7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <9df4e5eb-fba7-4e8c-ba44-cd1ad4081d3b@26g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>
 <ade14be1-de0a-4dfa-a2a5-6009fa6da139@l20g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <985a178c-8dfc-48af-9871-76a64750a571@l14g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <2penc6lgsop1583vmg9i0m429ri4ajaf9n@4ax.com>
 <d779c161-3199-45ca-87ae-d0501c74e219@26g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>
 <C8F36F83.1536B0%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
 <3450508b-9f26-4f26-8cd1-70149ca113dc@b17g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net bQxTKAnl4ZnsxCxC/PD5LwGHG5h5ouK4N/ikXqHm3J7WAMREsp
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QGGTx5DZwnX99/hHUaxTzU9Mymc=
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.23.0.091001
Thread-Topic: initialize an array (1-D) at elaboration using an expression
 based on the index?
Thread-Index: Act5Vf8lPGqfUUTw/Uuazxc0RsfNZA==
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15079
Date: 2010-10-31T23:47:37+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 31/10/2010 20:35, in article
3450508b-9f26-4f26-8cd1-70149ca113dc@b17g2000yqa.googlegroups.com, "Shark8"
<onewingedshark@gmail.com> wrote:

>> "Necessary" is not a valid criterion for anything more human-oriented than a
>> Turing machine. Remember that Ada views programming, above all, as a human
>> activity.
> 
> Hm, I disagree there. 'Necessary' is an extraordinarily valid
> criterion for precise-languages, and even precision within languages.
... 
> This relates, because we were discussing the design of languages
> (specifically Ada). If we were to throw in every idea that people had
> w/o regard to 'necessary' we would quickly have a mess of a language
> the result of which would make C++ look like Ada, comparatively. (That
> is to say, all hope of consistency would be lost.)

But this is a non sequitur. Saying that necessity is not a valid {I should
better have said "adequate"} criterion is is no way equivalent to saying
that that anything goes.  We are united in thinking that Ada should never
look like C++. I'm confident that there is no chance of that happening.

-- 
Bill Findlay
<surname><forename> chez blueyonder.co.uk