From: mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney)
Subject: Re: Operators Questions
Date: 1996/10/30
Date: 1996-10-30T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mheaney-ya023180003010961903550001@news.ni.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3275D478.5952@eurocontrol.fr
In article <3275D478.5952@eurocontrol.fr>, Richard Irvine
<Richard.Irvine@eurocontrol.fr> wrote:
Put this on my wish list for the next revision of the language: the ability
to overload the membership operator "in". That way I can say
generic
type T is private;
package Sets is
type Set is private;
function "in" (Left : T, Right : Set) return Boolean;
...
end;
package Integer_Sets is new Sets (Integer);
subtype Integer_Set is Integer_Sets.Set;
use Integer_Sets;
The_Set : Integer_Set;
begin
...
if 4 in The_Set then
...
I think that that's much hipper than
if Is_Member_Of (The_Set, Item => 4) then
...
But of course your mileage may vary.
Language designers: any reason overloading of "in" is too difficult for
inclusion in the language? Why can't you do this already? This exclusion
of the ability to overload "in" seems rather odd and unexpected.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Heaney
Software Development Consultant
mheaney@ni.net
(818) 985-1271
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-10-30 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-10-29 0:00 Operators Questions Richard Irvine
1996-10-29 0:00 ` Norman H. Cohen
1996-11-07 0:00 ` William Frye
1996-10-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-10-30 0:00 ` Fergus Henderson
1996-10-30 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney [this message]
1996-10-31 0:00 ` Michael F Brenner
1996-10-31 0:00 ` Adam Beneschan
1996-10-31 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1996-10-31 0:00 ` Adam Beneschan
1996-11-02 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-11-02 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1996-11-05 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox