Use Quantified Expressions

[pjljvandelaar]

Dear Developers,

Why don't you use Quantified Expressions at the following locations?

• semantic_versioning/src/semantic_versioning-basic.adb

  Lines 81 to 87 in cc69201

  	for R of VS loop
  	if not Satisfies (V, R) then
  	return False;
  	end if;
  	end loop;
  	return True;

-      for R of VS loop
-         if not Satisfies (V, R) then
-            return False;
-         end if;
-      end loop;
-
-      return True;
+      return (for all R of VS => Satisfies (V, R));

• semantic_versioning/src/semantic_versioning-extended.adb

  Lines 233 to 238 in cc69201

  	return OK : Boolean := True do
  	Trace ("AND children count:" & Trees.Child_Count (Pos)'Img);
  	for Child in VS.Set.Iterate_Children (Pos) loop
  	OK := OK and then Is_In (Child);
  	end loop;
  	end return;

             when Anded =>
                return OK : Boolean := True do
                   Trace ("AND children count:" & Trees.Child_Count (Pos)'Img);
-                  for Child in VS.Set.Iterate_Children (Pos) loop
-                     OK := OK and then Is_In (Child);
-                  end loop;
+                  OK :=
+                    OK
+                    and then
+                    (for all Child in VS.Set.Iterate_Children (Pos) =>
+                       Is_In (Child));
                end return;

Note that further simplifications are still possible ;-)

• semantic_versioning/src/semantic_versioning-extended.adb

  Lines 241 to 246 in cc69201

  	return OK : Boolean := False do
  	Trace ("OR children count:" & Trees.Child_Count (Pos)'Img);
  	for Child in VS.Set.Iterate_Children (Pos) loop
  	OK := OK or else Is_In (Child);
  	end loop;
  	end return;

             when Ored =>
                return OK : Boolean := False do
                   Trace ("OR children count:" & Trees.Child_Count (Pos)'Img);
-                  for Child in VS.Set.Iterate_Children (Pos) loop
-                     OK := OK or else Is_In (Child);
-                  end loop;
+                  OK :=
+                    OK
+                    or else
+                    (for some Child in VS.Set.Iterate_Children (Pos) =>
+                       Is_In (Child));
                end return;

Note that also in this case further simplifications are still possible ;-)

Greetings,
Pierre

[mosteo]

Because that code will likely be older than qualified expressions being generally available, or before they entered my mind as a valid possibility :-)