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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a00006d3c4735d70
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-25 08:06:26 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!adsl-213-200-246-247.cybernet.CH!not-for-mail
From: Vinzent 'Gadget' Hoefler <nntp-2004-02@t-domaingrabbing.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: In-Out Parameters for functions
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:05:41 +0100
Organization: JeLlyFish software
Message-ID: <lqhp30lbl0o3fu7nk9mj88satb6mmg8u8s@jellix.jlfencey.com>
References: <pan.2004.02.24.01.44.30.311621@email.ro>
 <1077634311.254581@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <pan.2004.02.24.23.23.33.578111@email.ro>
 <mailman.20.1077669870.327.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <pan.2004.02.25.09.01.17.858502@email.ro>
 <1077718871.47635@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <54cp3095jmv8s17h63d4bjdus0tec7l7pt@jellix.jlfencey.com>
 <1077721343.481619@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <ljgp301lgj3r0totpo3hlkmt3dbnbe0i33@jellix.jlfencey.com>
 <1077724400.221032@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-213-200-246-247.cybernet.ch (213.200.246.247)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1077725185 54238603 I 213.200.246.247 ([175126])
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5795
Date: 2004-02-25T17:05:41+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hyman Rosen wrote:

>The rules of Ada require that for "and", both
>operands are evaluated!

No, it doesn't.

>> BTW, the above is another reason why you shouldn't write functions
>> with side effects, because if you do the compiler *has* to evaluate
>> Sqrt, too. :-)
>
>If the compiler knows enough about Sqrt to know that it has no side
>effects, then it will have no problem checking b first even if you
>write (sqrt(x) > 5.0 and then b).

Well, in *this* case you *want* it to be evaluated first, I guess. :)

>Really, all these arguments sound so desperate.

Well, I don't build compilers. But - AFAICS - the only reason for not
fixing the evaluation order usually *is* code optimization.


Vinzent.