From: "J-P. Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr>
Subject: Re: Redefining "in" "operator"
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 17:43:09 +0100
Date: 2018-02-05T17:43:09+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <p5a2hc$pnr$1@dont-email.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <p5a0k1$9tk$1@dont-email.me>
Le 05/02/2018 à 17:26, Alejandro R. Mosteo a écrit :
> Are there special reasons not to allow something like that? I think "in"
> is not an operator in the Ada RM sense but now I'm curious why the
> special treatment.
Yes, there is ;-)
"in" is not an operator (i.e. a function), it's directly in the syntax
(see 4.4). And the reason for that is that the RHS is a membership
choice list, not an expression: there is no way you could write a
function whose argument is, f.e. a subtype or a range.
--
J-P. Rosen
Adalog
2 rue du Docteur Lombard, 92441 Issy-les-Moulineaux CEDEX
Tel: +33 1 45 29 21 52, Fax: +33 1 45 29 25 00
http://www.adalog.fr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-05 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-05 16:26 Redefining "in" "operator" Alejandro R. Mosteo
2018-02-05 16:39 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2018-02-06 0:48 ` Randy Brukardt
2018-02-06 18:07 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2018-02-05 16:43 ` J-P. Rosen [this message]
2018-02-05 17:23 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2018-02-05 17:41 ` Alejandro R. Mosteo
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox