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: 103376,9d303864ae4c70ad X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-11 03:31:55 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dialin-145-254-043-085.arcor-ip.NET!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Reprise: 'in out' parameters for functions Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:31:29 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <87brm1pksa.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <87lll4ydj9.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <87y8p45bpv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-043-085.arcor-ip.net (145.254.43.85) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1081679514 93745293 I 145.254.43.85 ([77047]) User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6972 Date: 2004-04-11T12:31:29+02:00 List-Id: Georg Bauhaus wrote: > Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > > : The only reasonable use of an access parameter is to have "in out" > : where it is not allowed. > > Access parameters go well with access discriminants...? Yes, but 1) .all works fine. If that is too much to type one could make access types more transparent. 2) why don't we have discriminants of any type? In many cases discriminants are used just because of absence of MI. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de