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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no 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: 2003-10-13 23:16:05 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!adsl-213-200-246-247.cybernet.CH!not-for-mail
From: Vinzent 'Gadget' Hoefler <ada.rocks@jlfencey.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: += in ada
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:14:54 +0200
Organization: JeLlyFish software
Message-ID: <bmg4b3$mhgq1$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
References: <3F89F4E9.7050601@comcast.net>
 <mailman.76.1066088235.25614.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
Reply-To: v.hoefler@acm.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-213-200-246-247.cybernet.ch (213.200.246.247)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1066112163 23642945 213.200.246.247 (16 [175126])
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:802
Date: 2003-10-14T08:14:54+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Alexandre E. Kopilovitch wrote:

>Robert I. Eachus wrote:
>
>> an issue.  Robert was happier with the Ada 83 rules.  Bob prefers the=20
>> Ada 95 rules.  But in 90+ percent of the cases where Constraint_Error=20
>> can occur, there are no practical differences between the rules.
>
>Isn't it exactly one of the situations for which pragmas exist? Both =
sides
>have their good arguments (which are adequate for different =
circumstances),
>battlefield is isolated, and collisions are relatively rare. Why not (as=
 all
>these conditions are established) introduce a pragma and thus close the =
issue?

Well, I am not sure if this argument really would apply here, but
pragmas should not change the semantics of correct code...


Vinzent.