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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,751584f55705ddb7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Side-effect arithmetic again [was: Ada ... in embedded systems]
Date: 1996/03/21
Message-ID: <dewar.827413120@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 143364653
references: <RALW.96Mar8113005@vulcan.gecm.com>
 <4ik5bm$ogg@dayuc.dayton.saic.com> <dewar.827181191@schonberg>
 <EACHUS.96Mar19195517@spectre.mitre.org> <DoJpJ7.I4I@world.std.com>
 <4irbm1$38i0@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-03-21T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Ada0x will have general procedure calls
             increment(item);
             decrement(item);
for all discrete types, of course ;-)  :-)"

Well of course this is a joke, but I trust everyone undrstands that, the
idea of "general" procedure calls is really horrible.

Only a true lover of verbosity could like increment(item) which is longer
than either

(a) the standard Ada form:  item := item + 1;

(b) the COBOL form (!)  add 1 to item

Of course a discussion like this always generates lots of discussion.
Unlike abstract types, type extnsions, overriding, dispatching etc,
everyone at least fully understands the idea of incrementing a variable :-)