Re: Question[s] about aliased extended return.

["Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>]

Le Fri, 09 Nov 2012 01:43:15 +0100, Randy Brukardt <randy@rrsoftware.com>  
a écrit:

> "Shark8" <onewingedshark@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9bbd99bd-f953-434d-b3c8-6e8a6d5c7dfd@googlegroups.com...
>> The syntax for the extended return given in the RM
>> [ http://www.ada-auth.org/standards/12rm/html/RM-6-5.html ] allows for  
>> the
>> usage
>> of the keyword ALIASED, with the restriction of "if the keyword aliased  
>> is
>> present
>>  in an extended_return_object_declaration, the type of the extended  
>> return
>> object
>>  shall be immutably limited."
>>
>> The 2012 rationale entry regarding the extended return
>> [ http://www.ada-auth.org/standards/12rat/html/Rat12-4-6.html ] says of
>> immutably limited objects:
>> * it is an explicitly limited record type,
>> * it is a task type, protected type or synchronized interface,
>> * it is a non-formal limited private type that is tagged or has an  
>> access
>> discriminant with a default expression, [or]
>> * it is derived from an immutably limited type.
>>
>> (1) Doesn't this reduce the usefulness of the extended return?
>
> No. Allowing "aliased" at all was a bug in Ada 2005; we preserved it only
> for compatibility (some GNAT customers used it a lot).

Why not list it in the Obsolescent Features section?

-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University