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-Thread: 103376,cced0e2ac94722f3 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Received: by 10.68.117.197 with SMTP id kg5mr1904080pbb.5.1325869393191; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 09:03:13 -0800 (PST) Path: lh20ni144912pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Adam Beneschan Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada2012 : Expression functions and extended return statements Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 08:45:07 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <26f343ea-d694-4089-b594-f32b471db3a4@m4g2000vbc.googlegroups.com> <94808f24-938b-476e-8912-f98b52982d53@j10g2000vbe.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1325869324 15696 127.0.0.1 (6 Jan 2012 17:02:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 17:02:04 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: ARLUEHNKC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; Trident/4.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30618; .NET4.0C),gzip(gfe) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2012-01-06T08:45:07-08:00 List-Id: On Jan 6, 5:13=A0am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote: > > The difference is that the declaration of [Result] in the extended > > return is that the compiler 'knows' that this is the declaration of > > something that's going to be returned - it can't know that in the > > ordinary return case. > > This is not a declaration, because the result is not an object. Not sure what you mean here, but 3.1(6) says it is indeed a declaration, and 3.3(10) and 3.3(20.1) say it's an object. -- Adam