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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,54889de51045a215 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-22 22:34:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: 18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: += in ada Date: 22 Oct 2003 22:34:03 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <3F900F35.50203@comcast.net> <3F92B607.809@comcast.net> <3F937806.9080205@comcast.net> <3F953687.9070406@comcast.net> <3F96DF31.5040501@comcast.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.194.87.148 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1066887244 20820 127.0.0.1 (23 Oct 2003 05:34:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 05:34:04 +0000 (UTC) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1493 Date: 2003-10-22T22:34:03-07:00 List-Id: "Robert I. Eachus" wrote in message news:<3F96DF31.5040501@comcast.net>... > Russ wrote: > > > I think "+=" or ":+" should be exactly equivalent to a procedure call. > > Nothing more. Nothing less. A procedure does not return anything, and > > neither should "+=". Sorry if that was not clear, but I really don't > > understand why it wasn't. Did I ever suggest that "+=" should be like > > a C function, with side effects *and* returning a value? I certainly > > don't recall suggesting anything like that. If I had, then your > > objections would have had some merit, but I did not. > > I agree, but then why have we had this huge, huge snitfit discussion? > Change the topic to a desire to be able to have procedures named "+=", > and you might generate some discussion or you might not. Again it won't > happen, but it won't be waving an emotional red flag. Well, I'm glad we finally have that cleared up. > I could probably go back and pick out a dozen posts where you swore that > it was the assignment side effect that you wanted in Ada, but who cares. I still don't understand where you got that impression. For overloaded "+=", I don't see how it could be anything other than a procedure. On the other hand, for built-in types such as integer and float (and all the scalar types derived from them), I would expect "+=" to be automatically available. It would be silly to require the programmer to define all those. I hope that is clear too.