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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Received: by 10.68.235.102 with SMTP id ul6mr1312136pbc.8.1335619321997;
        Sat, 28 Apr 2012 06:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 r9ni108302pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?=
 =?utf-8?Q?=29?=
 <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X?
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 15:21:59 +0200
Organization: Ada @ Home
Message-ID: <op.wdg8qxb1ule2fv@douda-yannick>
References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5>
 <op.wda9xaojule2fv@douda-yannick>
NNTP-Posting-Host: IScaDqz75PxjEZuwX9JhvA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.00 (Linux)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
Date: 2012-04-28T15:21:59+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:01:48 +0200, Yannick Duch=C3=AAne (Hibou57)  =

<yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> a =C3=A9crit:
> Mine:
> [=E2=80=A6]

Another one, from a Ludovic's quote elsewhere, I agree with (it happaned=
 I  =

felt the same)

Le Tue, 17 Apr 2012 05:43:49 +0200, Randy Brukardt <randy@rrsoftware.com=
>  =

a =C3=A9crit:

> "Georg Bauhaus" <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> wrote in message
> news:4f8c93a0$0$6638$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net...
>> On 16.04.12 20:00, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> ...
>>> Counter example:
>>
>> Only in case of universally quantified propositions. None of my  =

>> business.
>> But anyway,
>>
>>>     procedure Leave (When : Time);
>> ...
>> begin
>>    while Now < When loop
>>       delay Step;
>>       Now :=3D Clock;
>>    end loop;
>>    Left (Slot (When)) :=3D Now;  -- NB p.p. of to leave
>> end Leave;
>>
>> I have tried to choose only unspecific or ambiguous nouns.
>> Do you find this to be explaining itself well? Note the "well,"
>> not: possible to understand for the next few moments.
>
> This is irrelevant, because Ada requires the names of the parameters t=
o  =

> be
> those used in *calls*. The names used in the body probably ought to be=

> nouns, but in calls, verbs or adjectives often work better:
>
>     Leave (When =3D> Now);
>
> It is a smallish fault of Ada, in fact, because there almost never are=
  =

> names
> that work well both in calls and in the body.

Ability to give parameters, different names, one for body and one for  =

invokation place.

Actually, one can fake it choosing a name well suited for call=E2=80=91p=
laces  =

(where nothing can be done) and to use renaming of parameters in the bod=
y  =

(this, is something that can be done). That said, this is far to be a  =

priority, as we have renaming.

-- =

=E2=80=9CSyntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.=E2=80=9D [1]
=E2=80=9CStructured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.=
=E2=80=9D [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming =E2=80=94 Alan J. =E2=80=94 P. Yale Univers=
ity