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: 103376,25aa3c7e1b59f7b5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-01-19 06:17:06 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspeer.radix.net!uunet!ash.uu.net!world!news From: Robert A Duff Subject: Re: A case where Ada defaults to unsafe? Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 14:15:04 GMT References: <3C34BF2C.6030500@mail.com> <3C34D252.4070307@mail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19098 Date: 2002-01-19T14:15:04+00:00 List-Id: Brian Rogoff writes: > I assume that you are assuming that assignment will be less frequent than > object initialization, and so assignment gets the longer token? Well, if you program in a mostly-functional style, that would be true. But that's not why. It just seems like the "safer" thing should usually be shorter. > I'm not sure I like this proposal. Do we really want to think of constant > initialization as being like assignment? I think so. I want to think of constant initialization as being like variable initialization. In fact, I want the semantics to be identical. In other words, a constant and a variable are the same thing -- except you can't assign into a constant. >... It seems that we're really just > declaring its value, and that =, or "is" as someone else suggested, is > better. Yeah, "is" seems nice for constants, but it makes no sense for variables. Surely you don't want a different notation for variable initialization?! - Bob