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=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,9c41ceb9ae09ec6d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-03-11 13:44:58 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!insosf1.infonet.net!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!psinntp!ss3!ss5!jakrzy From: jakrzy@ss5.magec.com (James A. Krzyzanowski) Subject: Re: ADA FUNCTIONS TO PROCEDURES Message-ID: Sender: usenet@ss3.magec.com Nntp-Posting-Host: ss5 Organization: Magnavox Electronics Systems Company X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] References: <3jqjbp$im7@news.rain.org> Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 21:27:41 GMT Date: 1995-03-11T21:27:41+00:00 List-Id: Henri Altarac (haltarac@rain.org) wrote: : CONDIC@PSAVAX.PWFL.COM wrote: : > : > : > Robert Dewar writes: : > > : > >Can you tell us, just for curiosity, why anyone would want such a tool? : > >I would be surprised if one exists, because I can't see any legitimate use : > >for it! : > > : > I'd be inclined to agree, except for one possible issue. : I have another possible reason. : In some (strange) coding standard I saw, they required that : function should not have any side effects. Procedure could. : ----- : Henri Altarac What's so strange about that? At Magnavox, we DO have that as a coding standard! -- Not necessarily the opinion of the company... -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- James A. Krzyzanowski - Senior Software Engineer - AFATDS Magnavox Electronic Systems Company * Fort Wayne, IN 46808 * (219) 429-6446 jakrzy@most.magec.com Opinions_Expressed := (Mine and not Magnavox); "I'd rather be right than politically correct !!!" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------