Re: [PING^2] ada: Add limitations on the acceptable prefixes of 'Old

[Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>]

Samuel Tardieu wrote:
> On 10/05, Robert Dewar wrote:

> > >      8.    pragma Assert (X = (X)'Old);
> > >                                  |
> > >         >>> binary operator expected
> > This of course is illegal, (X) is not a name, so it is just
> > a syntactic error, arbitrary expressions are definitely NOT
> > allowed.
> >
> > Will look at rest of issues later ...
> > > Any idea on how to make this both robust and easy to understand?
>
> Do you confirm that F(3)'Old should be forbidden as well? If it does, I
> think I can produce a patch which fixes the other issues.

Why on earth should F(3)'Old be frobidden?

(X)'Old is simply forbidden syntactically, but there is nothing
wrong with F(3)'Old eithe syntactically or semantically.

I don't get this attempt to forbid Old in perfectly useful cases.
Can you explain your thinking that F(3) should be forbidden?

F(3) designates an object!