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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,799e6e37c90ca633 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) Subject: Re: Future Ada language revisions? Date: 1998/10/05 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 397927381 Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com (USENET news) X-Nntp-Posting-Host: houdini.camb.inmet.com References: <3618DAE7.326A@oen.siemens.de> Organization: Intermetrics, Inc. Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-10-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Alfred Hilscher (Alfred.Hilscher@oen.siemens.de) wrote: : I have an other question to the Ada95 design: Why does Ada not support : simple PROCEDURE-Types (like C or Modula). It does support such things. They are called "access-to-subprogram" types. : ... When writing GUI : applications, one needs always to pass callback routines. They are in : fact passed as procedure variables. In Ada one have to pass adresses : instead. While Ada has task type, I did not found any procedure type. Is : there really none (and if, why not) or am I blind ? Check your glasses ;-). And then look in RM95 3.10 for the discussion of "access-to-subprogram" types. : Alfred -- -Tucker Taft stt@inmet.com http://www.inmet.com/~stt/ Intermetrics, Inc. Burlington, MA USA An AverStar Company