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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,4873305131bf4d94
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,4873305131bf4d94
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,4873305131bf4d94
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Jon S Anthony <jsa@synquiry.com>
Subject: Re: Porting (was ADA and Pascal etc)
Date: 1997/10/31
Message-ID: <ufwwitwsp0.fsf@synquiry.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 287065987
Distribution: world
References: <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com>
 <ufsotiyesk.fsf@synquiry.com> <63bhta$g2e@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>
 <345AB871.413A@dynamite.com.au> <63d3sm$ap7$3@darla.visi.com>
 <fxtbu05g48l.fsf@isolde.mti.sgi.com>
Organization: PSINet
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Date: 1997-10-31T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Matt Austern <austern@isolde.mti.sgi.com> writes:

> The draft C++ standard is quite specific, and not at all random.  If
> you write
>     for (int i = 0; i < N; +i) {
>       // loop body
>     }
> then the scope of the variable i does not extend past the end of the 
> loop.  The same holds for while loops and if statements.
...
> I don't know whether Ada has any constructs where an analogous issue
> arises.

Construct: yes.  Issue: no, the semantics are nailed down and have
been since Ada83.

    for I in 1..N loop  -- Implicit declaration of I
        -- loop body
    end loop;           -- End of scope for I

/Jon

-- 
Jon Anthony
Synquiry Technologies, Ltd., Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha!  The way my life's been going lately,
 Who'd notice?"  -- Londo Mollari