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,d2f0af5e440b367f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-25 03:36:12 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.vmunix.org!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!news.iks-jena.de!not-for-mail From: Lutz Donnerhacke Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: proposal for new assignment operators Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 10:36:12 +0000 (UTC) Organization: IKS GmbH Jena Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: taranis.iks-jena.de X-Trace: branwen.iks-jena.de 1056537372 933 217.17.192.37 (25 Jun 2003 10:36:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@iks-jena.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 10:36:12 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39715 Date: 2003-06-25T10:36:12+00:00 List-Id: * Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > Provided 1.& 2. one could just enlarge the set of lexical elements and let > the programmer to choose what he/she wants. I would like to see "<+>", > "[+]", "(+)", "+:=", "<+>:=" etc added, but is that worth the efforts? No. The "idem" proposal is worth the efforts.