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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 103376,92d1af21ade61406
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-11-08 06:35:03 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.mathworks.com!oleane.net!oleane!nnrp.oleane.net!not-for-mail
From: "Jean-Pierre Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Problems with 'class, help anyone?
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 15:27:30 +0100
Organization: Guest of France Telecom Oleane's newsreading service
Message-ID: <aqgi20$d91$1@s1.read.news.oleane.net>
References: <pan.2002.10.29.04.48.24.252092@student.liu.se>
 <3DBE2593.9080800@worldnet.att.net>
 <pan.2002.10.30.05.27.31.99377@student.liu.se>
 <3DBF9437.8090408@worldnet.att.net>
 <pan.2002.11.05.02.40.38.47887@student.liu.se>
 <3DC74F23.80308@worldnet.att.net> <u7kfs9bex.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
 <wcc8z07fy6d.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <3DC91DBB.C85F27E@brighton.ac.uk>
 <wccr8dxbepf.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <aqg1a5$9ndb2$1@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <wcc1y5wi3bw.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mailhost.axlog.fr
X-Trace: s1.read.news.oleane.net 1036766080 13601 195.25.228.57 (8 Nov 2002
 14:34:40 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@oleane.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:34:40 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:30588
Date: 2002-11-08T15:27:30+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Robert A Duff" <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> a �crit dans le message news:
wcc1y5wi3bw.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com...
> > So I think that one should leave "function"s as they are, and
> > just allow procedures with results:
> >
> >    procedure Foo (...) return Bar;
>
> Yeah, and then eliminate the "function Foo..." syntax.
> That would solve the problem!
>
FWIW, early Ada (ca 1979) made the difference between functions (that had to
be pure) and "value returning procedures" with the above syntax, which
allowed arbitrary side-effects. This has been dropped in the process, but at
least it means that the issue has been considered.

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (rosen@adalog.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://www.adalog.fr