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=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ec3c155a33990ec6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: "Nick Roberts" <nick.roberts@acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: "out" and  "in out"
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 15:46:37 +0100
Message-ID: <opsbq1zzd0p4pfvb@bram-2>
References: <4104d5de@dnews.tpgi.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de N0rhljtprUGc7qKcZQY5/QSQdE0tL6KvlIMXI9m26zuutPVlg=
User-Agent: Opera M2/7.51 (Win32, build 3798)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2400
Date: 2004-07-26T15:46:37+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 19:58:22 +1000, zork <zork@nospam.com> wrote:

> ...
> By chance I created a small program as follows:
>
> ===========
> s : string := "CAT";
>
> procedure modify ( s1 : out string ) is
> begin
>    s1(2) := 'U';
> end modify;
>
> ..
>
> put ( modify(s) );
> ===========
>
> now I get as a result "CUT", and i dont understand why i get
> this result.

> Doesnt the "out" specify that its initial value isnt passed
> in via the parameter?

Yes, but it doesn't forbid the compiler to (effectively) pass
the value in. In practice, this is likely to happen if the
parameter is of a composite type (an array or record), because
the compiler will probably choose to pass it by reference.

> But it seems to be passed in the above. In fact the "out"
> is acting like an "in out".

Yes. This is permitted. But your program would be wrong to
rely upon it.

If you were to try:

===========
n : integer := 456;

procedure modify ( n1 : out integer ) is
begin
    n1 := n1+44;
end modify;

...

modify(n);
put(n);
===========

I think you might not get 500 printed out (I don't, running
this on GNAT 3.15p on Win XP (and GNAT gives a warning)).

-- 
Nick Roberts