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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable 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: 2004-02-24 16:46:59 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: In-Out Parameters for functions Date: 24 Feb 2004 19:44:12 -0500 Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: <1075390647.405841@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1075405582.982776@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1075482385.142744@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1075732402.294581@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1075741279.952497@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <16nu1099ekujjbpe9dqvs3noi9sdcfja6e@4ax.com> <1075817212.745748@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1075824683.769215@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <1075851506.238480@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <4020C947.81A6D703@0.0> <1075907239.138068@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <402232E9.3EE15B4B@0.0> <1075987360.225622@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <40236C0B.E988E003@0.0> <1077634311.254581@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1077669874 25422 212.85.156.195 (25 Feb 2004 00:44:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:44:34 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p7 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5780 Date: 2004-02-24T19:44:12-05:00 David Starner writes: > On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:51:44 -0500, Hyman Rosen wrote: > > As I have said over and over again, the problematic case is when > > it matters, and no one notices, and the compiler happens to do > > what you want. Then a change in environment could result in the > > order changing, and all of a sudden, code mysteriously breaks. > > And the life and death case is when it matters and the compiler does > what you want, and then maintainers change something, and after they > discover there were uncommented, incredibly subtle order issues, they > go out to kill the original smart-ass programmer. I think Hyman has two valid points: 1) if the language specified left-to-right order, there would never be a need to "kill the original smart-ass programmer" 2) Does anyone have a real example of a compiler taking advantage of the evaluation order freedom to speed up a program? Ada is supposed to be about clear, unsurprising code. Subtle order issues are just that - "subtle". If the language _could_ make them a non-issue, at very little cost, I think it _should_. I have not heard anyone respond to 2), which is supposedly the reason the freedom is there. If no compiler actually takes advantage of it, it's not worth having. I don't think there's much chance Ada will change in this area; it would cost more to change the documentation than it is worth. But we can at least be honest about it! -- -- Stephe