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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is this a bug in my code or the compiler?
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 12:37:31 -0700
Organization: Also freenews.netfront.net; news.tornevall.net;
 news.eternal-september.org
Message-ID: <mlfcbe$s4o$2@dont-email.me>
References: <4f4cd4b1-0a6d-441b-a4f7-98add70e4e1e@googlegroups.com>
 <1p71vf5ckbudu$.1qcb9ot1jpysk.dlg@40tude.net>
 <afb6fe82-1f67-49a8-b4b1-f814a71ba8fd@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 19:36:16 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="a3855fbfe1a666be9aefba0563039ed5";
	logging-data="28824"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/XzTCLPQk0AILyUrxcHrw2AiGIHkTH/VE="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
In-Reply-To: <afb6fe82-1f67-49a8-b4b1-f814a71ba8fd@googlegroups.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+DAtruWS+5KRbbx+72PCn5aqBVg=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:26293
Date: 2015-06-12T12:37:31-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 06/12/2015 10:53 AM, David Botton wrote:
> 
> A programmer having to worry about order of operation in a concatenation
> operation is a language flaw in my opinion. I can accept the issue in
> evaluation order of Boolean expressions or numerics (and knew of that), but
> not in non numeric types.

Boolean is a non-numeric type. You must mean "non-numeric types other than
boolean types".

You're using

function "&" (Left : in Character; Right : in String) return String;

which is predefined (and a similar "&" is predefined for all 1-D array types),
and want it to have different evaluation rules than if you define

function "&" (Left : in Integer; Right : in Integer) return Integer;

?

Order of evaluation is not defined for any subprogram (with more than 1
parameter). That's a simple rule. What you want seems much more complex.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Unix and C are the ultimate computer viruses."
Richard Gabriel
99