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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ab3fadb7cac7363c
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: using `use' : what is the best practice ?
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 16:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <03a8fa21-b515-41ea-bc65-b6ab85b0e88c@25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
References: <57e75a35-058c-4172-9a3d-e11e7c5f7697@l2g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.230.151.194
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1307489934 12604 127.0.0.1 (7 Jun 2011 23:38:54
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 23:38:54 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: 25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.230.151.194;
 posting-account=lJ3JNwoAAAAQfH3VV9vttJLkThaxtTfC
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKRC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1;
 rv:2.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/4.0.1,gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19689
Date: 2011-06-07T16:38:53-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Jun 7, 10:32=A0am, milouz <a.micheli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
> Sorry with my annoying questions, but it's not easy to program in Ada
> after 20 years programming in asm / C ;-)
>
> Maybe a not so anecdotic question : when using the 'use' clause ?
>
> My first thought is that using 'use' is not good because it masks the
> package tree.

While this is true it can be handy for reducing prefix-clutter,
as could a rename. So, while you may be hesitant to use them on the
package, I find using them in declare-blocks and subprograms to be
quite readable and usable.

With
Ada.Text_IO;

Package Body Example is
 [...]
 Procedure Something_Interesting is
   Use Ada.Text_IO; -- We're debugging here.
 begin
   [...]
  Put_Line( "Debugging marker." );
   [...]
 end Something_interesting;
End Example;

> For example, if I have 2 packages with procedures sharing the same
> name, example `P1.Foo' and `P2.Foo', my code won't be very readable if
> I only write the short name (`Foo') :
>
> =A0 =A0with P1; use P1;
> =A0 =A0with P2; use P2;
[...]
> As I'm very new, I'd like to have your opinion about the way to use
> 'use'.

Ah, I like to use the comma-separated forms of use/with; this can be
helpful if you wish to do a quick commenting out of a use or with to
pass to the compiler and see if you really need it at all.

EX:
With
Ada.Text_IO,
--Ada.Integer_IO, -- Am I even using Ada.Integer_IO?
--Ada.Tags,
--MY_PARSING_PACKAGE,
[...]
MY_CONSOLE_MANIPULATION_PACKAGE
;

Use
Ada.Text_IO,
--Ada.Tags,  -- Do I really need to USE tags?
MY_CONSOLE_MANIPULATION_PACKAGE;