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: 
 border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 09:27:05 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: a new language, designed for safety !
References: <lmj8s6$hhp$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <1402308235.2520.153.camel@pascal.home.net> <85ioo9yukk.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <e41c64cc-af26-4971-9db3-aec0fb4f5893@googlegroups.com>
 <9qednXOIGNDuLQXORVn_vwA@giganews.com>
 <1872904482424209024.314619laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org>
 <GtudnWClAsEmmQTORVn_vwA@giganews.com>
 <e3b1435a-499a-43b1-a7b7-6ee03167183f@googlegroups.com>
 <wrKdnYYvD8xzEATORVn_vwA@giganews.com>
 <810507a4-427e-42bb-a468-e5939a4470db@googlegroups.com>
 <lnd8l7$h89$1@dont-email.me> <9qbfr6yf0gnb.182y1qs9eigz4$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wccd2ec34um.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
In-Reply-To: <wccd2ec34um.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <539bf949$0$6667$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Jun 2014 09:27:05 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 6b20b2b1.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=?Gg_e:N5=2MX36K@\WTHGJMcF=Q^Z^V3H4Fo<]lROoRA8kF<OcfhCOK^ho\<72OWSOPCY\c7>ejVHJNo_2R6Oh[A4MW<NjLJYgB
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:186908
Date: 2014-06-14T09:27:05+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 13/06/14 22:57, Robert A Duff wrote:
> Yes, that's another example of the same language design principle.
> There ought to be a way to write procedure Do_Something, such that
>
>      Do_Something(Some_Array'Range);
>
> makes sense.  Except it might as well be
>
>      Do_Something(Some_Array.Range);
>
> or perhaps
>
>      Do_Something(Range(Some_Array));

Doesn't this one-type based approach limit the "forall" access to
the data to just one way? That is, why should arrays and *Range be
tied in the array type's definition?

   Syntax_for_Connect
     (Data => Some_Array,
      Access => Some_Iterator,
      Process_Item => Do_Something);

That still leaves unconsidered the case of picking pairs, e.g. Reduce.