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!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Redefining "in" "operator"
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:23:52 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <p5a3v8$ss0$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <p5a0k1$9tk$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9s2HXjYgtb87Rt4JbNw44Q.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.6.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3
Content-Language: en-US
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50308
Date: 2018-02-05T18:23:52+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2018-02-05 17:26, Alejandro R. Mosteo wrote:

> 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.

Because some arguments are not first class citizens.

> It's merely to avoid subversion of the default behavior? Couldn't it 
> only be allowed for couples of types where it doesn't apply?
That depends on which "in" need to become a normal function.

1. Type types: if X in T'Class then

2. Sets: if I in A'Range then

3. Indicator sets: for I in A'Range loop

Only #1 is very difficult. #2 and #3 require some mental efforts and 
willingness of ARG.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de