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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c3a7c1845ec5caf9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney) Subject: Re: Equality operator overloading in ADA 83 Date: 1997/05/06 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 239763340 References: <01bc4e9b$ac0e7fa0$72041dc2@lightning> <335F5971.6375@elca-matrix.ch> <01bc5244$315f1560$28f982c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com> <01bc54ef$2621d680$LocalHost@xhv46.dial.pipex.com> <336DC615.285E@elca-matrix.ch> Organization: Estormza Software Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-05-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: >A similar example arose during the 9X discussions, where > > raise x when ... > >was proposed. That's funny, because I was shocked to learn that that wasn't included in Ada 95. To me, that's a quite useful statement (unlike a case statement for non-discrete types - a silly idea), so I don't agree with the comparison. Tuck made the point once on CLA that the designers were trying to be conservative in this revision, and only add things that couldn't be done easily any other way, so I can certainly understand not adding it. One thing he mentioned that didn't go in that probably should have (I think that's what he said...) is procedure P (O : access constant T); I've actually had a use for this kind of thing. It would allow me to take the 'Access of an tagged parameter of mode in: procedure Q (O : in T) is begin P (O'Access); ... As it stands now I can't do that, because the object passed to "access T" has to be mode in out. Bummer. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Matthew Heaney Software Development Consultant (818) 985-1271