In article (Dans l'article) <72s09u$8b5@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com>, John McCabe wrote (�crivait)�: >Chris Morgan wrote: >>John McCabe writes: > >>> It's even easier than it seems if you use the facilities of the >>> language that Tom Moran has mentioned. > >>I gave two types of hints - algorithmic and "look in the >>book". Anything further seemed like doing other peoples homework! > >Accepted. Sorry if I caused offence. I'm sorry, I think made my homework. As I said, I'm in the process of learning Ada. I have look under "string", "coercing", "coercion" in both index of the two books I have on Ada that I have quoted in the original message. How could I find by myself starting from "coerce" that the answer was in the attribute of the type ? Some people where kind enough to give me the beginning of an answer like the following that was truly informative. Integer'Image ( 1.0 ) = " 1.0" Integer'Value ("1.0") = 1.0 Also look at the toc of the REFMAN in its website incarnation. Do you think that its easy to find in this toc "some helpful functions in the back of the Ada Language Reference Manual (findable on the web if you don't have it)". The toc even don't mention the word "function". Core Language 1. General -- TOC 2. Lexical Elements -- TOC 3. Declarations and Types -- TOC 4. Names and Expressions -- TOC 5. Statements -- TOC 6. Subprograms -- TOC 7. Packages -- TOC 8. Visibility Rules -- TOC 9. Tasks and Synchronization -- TOC 10. Program Structure and Compilation Issues -- TOC 11. Exceptions -- TOC 12. Generic Units -- TOC 13. Representation Issues -- TOC Annexes A. Predefined Language Environment -- TOC B. Interface to Other Languages -- TOC C. Systems Programming -- TOC D. Real-Time Systems -- TOC E. Distributed Systems -- TOC F. Information Systems -- TOC G. Numerics -- TOC H. Safety and Security -- TOC J. Obsolescent Features -- TOC K. Language-Defined Attributes L. Language-Defined Pragmas M. Implementation-Defined Characteristics N. Glossary P. Syntax Summary Maybe its obvious for some that the answer Chris Morgan gave me was enough, but it was not for me. I'm coming from the scripting world (so I'm a lazy "typer"), and when I answer a question from a newbie on a mailing list, I always, either give a complete reference (page number, URL), or a piece of code, or both. Think how far his answer was taking me away from a simple and quick response. I really don't want to start a flame war on this, I waited a couple of days before writing anything more on this thread. I don't think that I will write more on it in the future. Cheers -- Emmanuel emm*cam.org where * = @