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,e859f774bbb3dfb3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!nlpi057.nbdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!flpi088.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.com!flpi107.ffdc.sbc.com!nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com.POSTED!cfe18fef!not-for-mail From: Gary Scott Organization: Home User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: another way to shoot yourself in the foot? References: <54157920-377a-441b-9b0b-f0c4f9ddffec@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> <54435596-5e7f-4686-a2b7-1e22d7c4b186@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.94.45.251 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com 1215265133 ST000 68.94.45.251 (Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:38:53 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:38:53 EDT X-UserInfo1: Q[O]R^OGLBUUSWTXZBND]_\@VR]^@B@MCPWZKB]MPXH@ETUCCNSKQFCY@TXDX_WHSVB]ZEJLSNY\^J[CUVSA_QLFC^RQHUPH[P[NRWCCMLSNPOD_ESALHUK@TDFUZHBLJ\XGKL^NXA\EVHSP[D_C^B_^JCX^W]CHBAX]POG@SSAZQ\LE[DCNMUPG_VSC@VJM Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:38:50 -0500 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1018 Date: 2008-07-05T08:38:50-05:00 List-Id: Colin Paul Gloster wrote: > Jeffrey R. Carter wrote in message > news:brz7k.167222$TT4.46081@attbi_s22 ... > |------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |" Robert A Duff wrote: > | > |[..] > | > | > | > |> As Dmitry pointed out, with this idea, there's no need for the "return > | > |> Result;". > | > | > | > | True, but I find it easier to understand the function if it has the > explicit | > | "return Result;"," > | > |------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > > I believe that "return Result;" is fine. It is true that it is not > necessary, in much the same way that IN is redundant for a function's > mode. Some people had criticized IN for a function for the same > reason, but people who use many languages (or instead, who do not > program much) should not be forced to memorize all the ramifications > of particular language semantics if a piece of excess syntax makes it > clear for them. > > |------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |" even though I came to Ada from a Pascal background." > | > |------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > > Speaking of which, after my unsuccessful job application to you > earlier this year (thank you for having the decency to treat my > application properly though, as did other some contributors to this > newsgroup when I applied to them, but unfortunately a number of others > were disrespectful) I very recently joined a group of people who on > average do not work predominantly as programmers. The languages which > I have been told are in some of their backgrounds are FORTRAN and C++, > and we have FORTRAN and C++ codebases which I should improve. How > better to start than by porting to Ada!? Or Fortran 95 or Fortran 2003 (ok, 2003 is nearly available) > Regards, > Colin Paul Gloster > > -- Gary Scott mailto:garylscott@sbcglobal dot net Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org -OR- Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows it can't be done. -- Henry Ford