Re: Unary operator after binary operator: legal or not?

[anon@anon.org (anon)]

This maybe a compiler error.  It seams that my GNAT 2.1 from (NYC) as 
well as my GNAT 4.3 (GNU) and my Adacore GNAT 2005 (GPL) all state 
the same that it there is a "missing operand". But if you use the 
following:
       return "+"(Left) & "+"(Right);
or 
       return (+Left) & (+Right);
they both work

From LRM 4.4 .. 4.5 and LRM 6.6 states that the unary functions can be 
redefined.  The reason I say this may be an compiler error is because 
the following will still give the same error: 

Compiling: xyz.adb (source file time stamp: 2007-07-30 03:00:04)

     1. 
     2. function Xyz (Left, Right : in integer) return integer is
     3. 
     4. begin -- Xyz
     5.     if +Left <= +Right then
     6.        return +Left * +Right;
                             |
        >>> missing operand

     7.     end if;
     8. end Xyz;




In <KYtri.46105$Fc.35820@attbi_s21>, "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@acm.nospam.org> writes:
>Here's something confusing I encountered:
>
>with Ada.Strings.Unbounded;
>
>function Xyz (Left, Right : in Ada.Strings.Unbounded.Unbounded_String)
>return String is
>    function "+" (Right : in Ada.Strings.Unbounded.Unbounded_String)
>    return String renames Ada.Strings.Unbounded.To_String;
>begin -- Xyz
>    if +Left <= +Right then
>       return +Left & +Right;
>       --            ^ Error reported here.
>    end if;
>end Xyz;
>
>A compiler reports "missing operand", referencing the space after the "&".
>
>Why then does it accept the comparison in the previous line? Both are
>
>+Left [binary operator] +Right
>
>-- 
>Jeff Carter
>"Have you gone berserk? Can't you see that that man is a ni?"
>Blazing Saddles
>38