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: 2004-02-02 01:30:09 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!tar-atanamir.cbb-automation.DE!not-for-mail
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: In-Out Parameters for functions
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:38:15 +0100
Message-ID: <m96s10hqb2e7gpdparvs7h118ehdcfs7ol@4ax.com>
References: <6fjh109qllmjek7ud2me7k1t40so3ervmk@4ax.com>
 <mailman.75.1075505954.2270.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tar-atanamir.cbb-automation.de (212.79.194.116)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1075714208 28323935 212.79.194.116 ([77047])
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5176
Date: 2004-02-02T10:38:15+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 02:39:43 +0300 (MSK), "Alexandre E. Kopilovitch"
<aek@VB1162.spb.edu> wrote:

>Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>
>> I am afraid that allowing IN OUT parameters would be inconsistent with
>> the functions of the protected objects. Provided that the prefix
>> notation creeps Ada, it will be difficult to explain when X.Foo may
>> change X and when not.
>
>If we require a mark for IN OUT parameter at call cite, that is,
>
>  F(keyword X)
>
>then X.F will be illegal (given that
>
>   keyword F.X
>
>is illegal).

Why should we do it at call site?

--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
www.dmitry-kazakov.de