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: 103376,100c539a37d7d2e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-15 18:11:09 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!newsfeed!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: chained List manipulation without recusrsion : lost the begining of my List! Date: 15 May 2003 21:11:08 -0400 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1053047468 12383 199.172.62.241 (16 May 2003 01:11:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 01:11:08 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37370 Date: 2003-05-15T21:11:08-04:00 List-Id: Simon Wright writes: > "Zeg" writes: > > Z : Liste := null; > > You don't need to initialize access variables, they are automatically > set to null for you True, but I think a good style is to always use explicit initialization if you are going to depend on the initial "null" (as opposed to just using it to trip up uninitialized pointers). - Bob