From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 21 Jul 93 15:26:01 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.
reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!network.ucsd.edu!news.cerf.net!sh
rike.irvine.com!adam@ucbvax.Berkeley.  (Adam Beneschan)
Subject: Re: gethostname (Was: SunAda question)
Message-ID: <CAItJE.6Kt@irvine.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <9307202026.aa28700@Paris.ics.uci.edu> 
kanderso@mabillon.ICS.UCI.EDU (Kenneth Anderson) writes:

>   The function gethostname is defined as :
>
>           function gethostname(name: address; namelen: integer)
>             return status_code;
>
>
>
>
>   Turns out that this function is not a function. It actually returns TWO
>   values!  Here is an example program that will correctly use this "function.
"
>
>      function Get_Host_Name return String is
>
>         length   : INTEGER := 64;
>         hostname : STRING(1..Length);
>         result   : status_code;
>         counter  : integer;
>
>      begin
>         result := unix.gethostname(hostname(1)'address, length);
>         if result = Unix.OK then
>            for i in 1 .. length loop
>               if hostname (i) = ascii.nul then
>                  counter := i - 1;
>                  exit;
>               end if;
>            end loop;
>            return hostname(1 .. counter);
>         else
>            return "";
>         end if;
>      end Get_Host_Name;
>
>
>   That's right, after the call to gethostname, the variable hostname
>   has been modified to contain a string which is the hostname of the
>   machine that the program is running on...
>
>   Frankly, I'm offended!  This completely violates everything that I've
>   been taught about Ada functions! The actual parameters of a function
>   should not be modified.  A function should only return one value.
>
>   Wow, this is ugly! (Me thinks me smells a C programmer lurking
>                       behind that "function"...)

No need to get offended.  This function is obviously a direct
interface to the UNIX system call.  (I.e., no Ada code was written;
the function was declared with PRAGMA INTERFACE or the equivalent.) 

When you're interfacing to an external routine that returns a value
(presumably in a register), but also modifies its parameters, you
really have no choice except to declare a function that modifies its
parameters.  It's ugly, but it's really the only thing you can do.
(VAX Ada provides a neat variation of PRAGMA INTERFACE in which you
can declare it as an Ada *procedure*, and declare an OUT parameter to
hold the value returned in the register;  but I haven't seen this in
any other Ada.)

Yes, the Unix package could have hidden the implementation details in
the package body and provided a better-looking Ada interface.  But, I
suppose, there's an advantage to allowing the programmer direct access
to the UNIX system functions, without the overhead involved in
"Adaifying" it.

                                -- Adam

--
Standard disclaimers, with a few non-standard ones thrown in just to
confuse you.