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-Thread: a07f3367d7,dbbbb21ed7f581b
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!209.197.12.246.MISMATCH!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!198.186.194.249.MISMATCH!transit3.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news-out.readnews.com!transit4.readnews.com!panix!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Operation can be dispatching in only one type
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:47:21 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc1vjqteom.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: 
 <025105f2-5571-400e-a66f-ef1c3dc9ef32@g27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
 <691d6892-bc5e-4d81-8025-c36556bf2593@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
 <1h9hilcg5i6il.12edpgu4szw1h.dlg@40tude.net>
 <b8b7c578-b069-43e9-bdfa-962c43a0308c@t11g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
 <1wtsriaxu0s4s$.ikwnnz5teukp$.dlg@40tude.net> <he23dv$k4c$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <1iipp3bn16fe2.yqa1gz1ru17a$.dlg@40tude.net> <he4ls1$n2o$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <18wh86jvjvoe0.cofxcc8udm6q$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <53a35ed9-88ac-43dc-b2a2-8d6880802328@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
 <4b091fb9$0$6567$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <1w0q3zxzw79pt$.5z0juiky7kfd$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <f67ccfbf-3e78-4522-b5fd-a0d9c6088fb0@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
 <yot6ojn4rhnq$.1ar1elvvs8g09.dlg@40tude.net>
 <0f177771-381e-493b-92bb-28419dfbe4e6@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
 <1nbcfi99y0fkg.1h5ox2lj73okx$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <59acf311-3a4a-4eda-95a3-22272842305e@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
 <e1p8csy5enz.1ndzb6tlh7ckb$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls6.std.com 1258926433 14564 192.74.137.71 (22 Nov 2009 21:47:13
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:47:13 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dqqAXVCf30wejTUnxRQrkZI/EvE=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8203
Date: 2009-11-22T16:47:21-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:

> P.S. ":=" for initialization of limited objects might look misleading (and
> does look misleading to me), but that would be another discussion on Ada
> design, in which nobody would agree with me. So I prefer not to go into it.

Well, I would agree.

Ada uses the term "assignment" to refer to both "initial assignment /
initialization" and "assignment_statement / overwriting".
I'd prefer to use different symbols for the two.
We're not going to change Ada in that regard, for compatibility reasons,
but I'm thinking in my hobby language design to use the term "assignment"
for the initial one, and "reassignment" for the subsequent overwriting
one, and use different symbols for the two.

So, for a limited type, "assignment" is legal, "reassignment" is not.

What do you think?

- Bob