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,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no 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: 2003-06-05 12:13:55 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.gbronline.com!news.gbronline.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 14:13:56 -0500
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 14:14:21 -0500
From: Wesley Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com>
Reply-To: wesgroleau@despammed.com
Organization: Ain't no organization here!
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US;
 rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030425
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, es-mx, pt-br, fr-ca
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ideas for Ada 200X
References: <6a90b886.0305262344.1d558079@posting.google.com>
 <bebbba07.0305292326.75f5fbef@posting.google.com>
 <6vWcnTWjF83bD0qjXTWcpA@gbronline.com>
 <bebbba07.0305311049.753bb8f0@posting.google.com>
 <KvydnZ2dnunHfUej4p2dnA@gbronline.com>
 <bebbba07.0306022127.46f6c998@posting.google.com>
 <3EDCBDF4.1050900@attbi.com>
 <bebbba07.0306031420.69c20f71@posting.google.com>
 <BB02E370.30D1%yaldnifw@blueyonder.co.uk>
 <bebbba07.0306031837.4c7de732@posting.google.com> <uadcxwzhi.fsf@nasa.gov>
 <bebbba07.0306041438.6cf89e79@posting.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <bebbba07.0306041438.6cf89e79@posting.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <CYOdnX4qp9noC0KjXTWcoA@gbronline.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.117.18.104
X-Trace: 
 sv3-VCKwU6haQfPQ8+REH/NVoxH+SXYgk/8bLd4PBGuxjO99UWvcxcz3ZSXXbPlpDosT3/7wYJuCsjMBHB7!foDeEnjfthvKxN9UApLAy6wDH55LVIT/AJjBo/ZW/uxEYNnaNvEsbcewsa8eK+rvCjnI62PIHYa4!LAERLQ==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38728
Date: 2003-06-05T14:14:21-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Russ wrote:
> I think you're missing something here. I would write "+=" too.

If the _coder_ is going to define Add() and "+" and "+="
then clearly it is misleading to claim that "+=" is
always more efficient.

But if a language standard requires   A += B
to always be equivalent to            A := A + B
then clearly it is misleading to
insist that either one will always
be more efficient.