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,d00514eb0749375b
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!138.195.8.3.MISMATCH!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: initialize an array (1-D) at elaboration using an expression
 based on the index?
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 12:10:09 -0600
Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen
Message-ID: <ibjvu4$c9a$1@munin.nbi.dk>
References: <i9amkr$goj$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <1f6bad81-e3d2-428b-a1a0-45acc7f96f68@m7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <9df4e5eb-fba7-4e8c-ba44-cd1ad4081d3b@26g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>
 <ade14be1-de0a-4dfa-a2a5-6009fa6da139@l20g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <985a178c-8dfc-48af-9871-76a64750a571@l14g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <2penc6lgsop1583vmg9i0m429ri4ajaf9n@4ax.com>
 <d779c161-3199-45ca-87ae-d0501c74e219@26g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net
X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1289585412 12586 69.95.181.76 (12 Nov 2010 18:10:12 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:10:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15452
Date: 2010-11-12T12:10:09-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Shark8" <onewingedshark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:d779c161-3199-45ca-87ae-d0501c74e219@26g2000yqv.googlegroups.com...
>> ... having been raised on Algol-W I am delighted to see them come back.
>>
>> Is it their unfamiliarity that disturbs you?
>
> No, not so much.
> I don't see how they are [strictly-speaking] necessary, given that we
> have declare-blocks (which can be arbitrarily-nested).
> Granted, they would make it a lot less verbose in many cases. {BTW, if
> we're going to allow if/then statements inside expressions &
> assignments/initializations then what's keeping us from using case-
> statements too?}

(Yes, Ada2012 has case expressions; coverage checking is important and not 
be be sacrificed just because you are writing an expression.)

You can't write a declare block in a declarative part, inside of a pragma, 
or (for Ada 2012) inside of an aspect specification or expression function. 
The first is a significant problem in Ada 95; you have to write:

                  Max_Value : constant Natural := Boolean'Pos(<some 
expr>)*TRUE_VALUE+
                                                                    Boolean'Pos(not 
<some expr>)*FALSE_VALUE;

In order to get a static conditional expression. To claim that the above is 
at all understandable or readable is BS, plus it duplicates the expression.

                  Max_Value : constant Natural := (if <some expr> then 
TRUE_VALUE else FALSE_VALUE);

is worlds better. And it gets even more fun if you have multiple cases...

                             Randy.