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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f3437064e1091fec
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-14 03:32:21 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out1.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in-sterling.newsfeed.com!newsfeed.onecall.net!chcgil2-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen
From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What evil would happen?
Date: 14 Jul 2003 05:32:18 -0500
Organization: LJK Software
Message-ID: <sEnU4h6wyksM@eisner.encompasserve.org>
References: <5ad0dd8a.0307111151.4a08f95a@posting.google.com>
 <1LEPa.9034$nP.7178@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>
 <beo2sh$7db25$1@ID-25716.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <5ad0dd8a.0307120426.226775f1@posting.google.com>
 <slrnbh00ch.3fv.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <h8qIYsorss4x@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <slrnbh02sj.4kj.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <mJNQqsqNbeDI@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <slrnbh4r8u.hn.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org
X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1058178721 21645 192.135.80.34 (14 Jul 2003
 10:32:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 10:32:01 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:40258
Date: 2003-07-14T05:32:18-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <slrnbh4r8u.hn.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> writes:
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
>> 
>> That presumes:
>> 
>> 	1. There is no valid meaning for returning a null username.
>> 	2. There is no desire to return _two_ constrained values.
>> 	3. There is no desire to return a non-Boolean constrained value.
>> 
>>> You have to
>>> do if my_result then anyway so there is really not much difference to
>>> the code. However I would have concidered throwing an exception in the
>>> case the parsing failed.
>> 
>> That presumes:
>> 
>> 	4. The only use for a constrained value return is to indicate
>> 	   failure.
> 
> Well if not then use a record with username and the boolean variable and
> return that

Nobody has claimed there was no way to program around this obstacle.
The claim under discussion was that there is "no use" for the capability.