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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Access parameters and accessibility Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:57:31 -0500 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: pcls7.std.com 1418741852 25216 192.74.137.71 (16 Dec 2014 14:57:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:57:32 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix) Cancel-Lock: sha1:wikek2HoFhbnuM2OmwlmjzfonJw= Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24048 Date: 2014-12-16T09:57:31-05:00 List-Id: Natasha Kerensikova writes: > On 2014-12-16, Randy Brukardt wrote: >> Anonymous access parameters: just say no!! > > I still believe a case could be made for anonymous access to subprogram > parameters. Yes, that's a completely different feature, and won't get you in any trouble. But those are conceptually subprograms, not pointers; the syntax should be: procedure P(X: procedure ... instead of the noisy: procedure P(X: not null access procedure ... > Generics and interfaces could of course be used instead of them, but I > feel they are often more cumbersome to use. Yes. Now what we need is lambdas. - Bob