inout-mode parameters

1.4: adda/syntax/{inout, out}-mode parameters:
. {inout, out}-mode parameters are special because
they create sideaffects .
. anyone coming from any other language
will be assuming that if you pass a pointer
then it means you get to modify
anything accessable by that pointer;
-- that is the whole point of pointers,
unless their targets are typed as being read-only mode;
other languages have created a lot of bugs too,
so we really should carefully reconsider
designing our functions to be functional by default .
. the usual understanding of aParam typed as
pointer to int is read-only pointer to inout int;
whereas, what we are assuming here is
read-only pointer to read-only int .
. the usual understanding of an
inout param typed as pointer to int is
inout pointer to inout int;
whereas, what we are assuming here is
inout pointer to read-only int .]

. the Ada goto label was chosen as notation that alarms,
and that's why I had chosen it for out-moding params;
eg, x<</.int>> 
would be used for having
the param x, a pointer to int,
out-moding on both the pointer and the int; [1.6:
however, something similar and easier to read is (^);
will it be confused with the power operator?
if it's placed at the back of the typemark,
then it clearly gives a context to reader and parser .]

. the most elegant way to define inout mode
is to unify it with its implied activity: inititialization .
. param's can specify default init values,
and if that init is the param' being defined,
that would imply inout mode
while doing something else essential . [1.6:
. however,
it seems counter to the intended model,
because defaults are supposed to tell you
what happens when you fail to supply the actual param,
implying that it's optional,
by contrast, what we're trying to say is:
not only is the param' instantiation not optional,
but the actual param's initial value is not optional either;
so, another idea is to precede the (out)-symbol
with an (in)-symbol such as (&);
since the default is in-mode,
and t^ means t is out-mode,
so t&^ would say t is in-mode & out-mode .
. if that seems like a stretch, then how about t'^ ?
the apostrophe seems like an arrow pointing down,
while the caret is arrow pointing up,
hence an iconic representation of inout;
and being on the back side of types,
it would fit in with the proposed typemark for
rom (read-only mem): t! .]-1.6

. when types contain types,
as in /.int (the type"pointer to int)
we need a notation to specify
which of those types can be modified;
therefore we can not
simply apply the notation to the parameter name,
as is done in other languages .
. we can provide that as an option though;
eg # inout aParam/.int!
--. this provides read-write access to
a pointer to a read-only int
(same as our aParam/'^.int);
eg # inout aParam/!.int
-- read-only access to a pointer to a read&writable int
(same as aParam/.int'^).]
. notice that, among container types such as
/.int (a pointer.type containing the int.type)
if you don't need the value of a param
(and are thus giving it the attribute out-mode),
you certainly don't need the values of any type within;
eg, /^.int'^ wouldn't make sense because
how can there be a value to get from the int
when there no value expected from
the pointer that is needed to access the int?

. if something like "(/^.int'^ )
could never make sense to some users anyway,
they should be allowed to use simple english too:
{out, inout } -- copy is the default .
. inout-mode could be understood to be
a property possessed by a type,
hence the use of the possessive operator:
/'^.int^ becomes /`inout.int`out (read:
pointer's inout to int's out ).
. another idea is that
{out, inout} would be functions over types,
so instead of needing a possessive operator,
you could simply use a space:
x/'^.int^ becomes x.inout /.out int .
. in this case, {inout, out} need to be reserved words?
we could allow renaming them,
eg, {o, io} or {wo, rw} might be popular .]-1.6
. by letting {out, inout} be a function,
it would also make sense to do it Ada's way:
letting the inout apply to the param itself,
instead of applying to each of the param's nested types;
inout x/.int -- just give me inout everything!

. why do you suppose Ada doesn't facilitate
applying {inout, out} to each of the param's
nested types?
[1.7: besides the fact that it's param's can
only trivially be container types
(you need to use a single type name
or a pointer to typename)]
. perhaps they are mostly concerned with
a transaction model:
this is where the implementation of out-mode
has the option of either using a reference,
or else doing a copy-in then copy-out .
. doing it my way could save much copying,
because suppose you have a pointer to a huge tree;
if all you want to do is modify the pointer,
then the copy-in©-out system
doesn't have to copy that huge tree for you! ]-1.6

1.7: web: ada parameters:
. Ada's rationale for not supporting pass-by-reference:
{. parameter passing by reference for access types
is not expected by most algorithms and will result in
those algorithms being incorrect .}
. access types are already unique in that the programmer is
permitted explicitly to manipulate references and construct aliases:
This is the purpose of access types,
and programmers using such types are asserting that
they wish to take control of all references and aliases.
Accordingly, the parameter passing should not generate
extra references and aliases of which the programmer is unaware;
therefore, all parameter passing for access types
should be by copy.
A final problem with parameter passing by reference
is that this mechanism will be almost impossible to achieve
(or at least, very costly) on distributed systems
and when dealing with systems having multiple address spaces.
. but the 2012 version does support them .
ada parameters/syntax:
2005 parameter_specification ::=
defining_identifier_list : mode [null_exclusion]
subtype_mark [:= default_expression]
| defining_identifier_list : access_definition
[:= default_expression]

2012 parameter_specification ::=
defining_identifier_list : [aliased] mode [null_exclusion]
subtype_mark [:= default_expression]
| defining_identifier_list : access_definition
[:= default_expression]

access_definition ::=
[null_exclusion] access [constant] subtype_mark
| [null_exclusion] access [protected]
procedure parameter_profile

| [null_exclusion] access [protected]
function parameter_and_result_profile access subtype_mark