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: 103376,38fc011071df5a27
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-03 06:20:19 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!news.iks-jena.de!not-for-mail
From: Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@iks-jena.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ideas for Ada 200X
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:20:19 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: IKS GmbH Jena
Message-ID: <slrnbdp84f.ns.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
References: <6a90b886.0305262344.1d558079@posting.google.com>
 <VjOAa.16051$8g5.257873@news2.e.nsc.no> <3ED41344.7090105@spam.com>
 <3ED46D81.FF62C34F@0.0> <3ED46E07.4340CABC@0.0>
 <3ED4F3FD.A0EF7079@alfred-hilscher.de> <xIeBa.1017346$3D1.597085@sccrnsc01>
 <bebbba07.0305292326.75f5fbef@posting.google.com>
 <6vWcnTWjF83bD0qjXTWcpA@gbronline.com>
 <bebbba07.0305311049.753bb8f0@posting.google.com>
 <KvydnZ2dnunHfUej4p2dnA@gbronline.com>
 <bebbba07.0306022127.46f6c998@posting.google.com>
 <slrnbdp1mg.1lk.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <slrnbdp1pp.ns.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de> <3EDC8AA9.7000405@noplace.com>
 <slrnbdp47s.ns.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
 <slrnbdp59t.583.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <slrnbdp5jm.ns.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
 <slrnbdp6c2.583.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: taranis.iks-jena.de
X-Trace: branwen.iks-jena.de 1054646419 25714 217.17.192.37 (3 Jun 2003
 13:20:19 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@iks-jena.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:20:19 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38468
Date: 2003-06-03T13:20:19+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

* Preben Randhol wrote:
> Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
>> Please to instantiate it for every countable type A, you use and any
>> universal_integer B. Thank you.
> 
> Ok I can agree. But at least I would rather have
>
>    A :=+ B
> or
>    A +:= B
>
> whichever is more clear.

It's more clear, because you know this limited idiom from an other language.

> Because in my view A += B will mess up Ada as we have:

A /= B already has a defined meaning so this approach will always fail.

> But that means one would need to limit this operator to procedures?
>    procedure ":=+" (Left: in out T; Right: in T);

No, it's a too limited approach. Much more flexible is the suggestion to use
a special symbol to reference the LHS on the RHS expression.

So you can write:
  A(i).dispaching_call(get_next_position) := <> - y / (2*<>);