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: 103376,3d6ef988ec3a5ef7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: renaming Interfaces.Java.Ada_To_Java_String to the + operator Date: 1998/01/13 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 315714675 References: <01bd1e34$1632c2c0$24326489@Westley-PC.calspan.com> <34bba5a1.224459@SantaClara01.news.InterNex.Net> X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 884741268 19848 (None) 128.122.140.58 Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-01-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Tom Moran said <> Presumably in the context you intend the "+" to be a unary conversion operator. This conversion operator would then apply to "abc", since & is an adding operator. Now I would not expect everyone to know the relative precedence of these operators (I am too close to the compiler in this regard, I even know what the value of -5/3 is, careful that's a trick question :-) So if you had to write this, I would think a responsible programmer would write: (+"abc") & "xyz" to emphasize the meaning, although perhaps one might decide that the normal spacing around binary operators is enough (such spacing is a standard part of the GNAT lexical conventions, spaces for binary operators, but not for unary operators) +"abc" & "xyz" However, in real practice this is a somewhat unlikely piece of program code in any case. Why? Because normally one would create a set of coherent abstractions in which there was an & operator that did the conversion automatically. It is only when a term appears on its own that the use of "+" is really necessary.