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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1de1981df403322c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-11-12 09:37:56 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn14feed!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!attbi_s01.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tmoran@acm.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: New limited range type?
References: <Y76dnVCSI5-Czi-i4p2dnA@comcast.com>
X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader
Message-ID: <Tdusb.180367$HS4.1500837@attbi_s01>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.234.124.41
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-Trace: attbi_s01 1068658675 12.234.124.41 (Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:37:55 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:37:55 GMT
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:37:55 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2427
Date: 2003-11-12T17:37:55+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>In the case of a (language or implementation defined) attribute, you
>would have to write every calculation such as this as:
>
>X := Some_Subtype'Limit(A + B - C);
>
>Of course, that makes what is going on very clear...
  Sometimes "very clear" conflicts with "higher abstraction level".
If the variables involved were light intensities in 0 .. 255, say,
"Observed := Direct + Reflected - Absorbed;" says what's going
on just fine, IMHO.  If someone wants to be even more explicit,
"Observed := Brightness'(Direct + Reflected - Absorbed);" should
do the job.  It's overkill to say
"Observed := Brightness'Limit(Direct + Reflected - Absorbed);"