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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f24b55bcdf15c088 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-03-07 16:05:25 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!easynews!feedwest.us.telia.net!feedeast.us.telia.net!us.telia.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news1.sttls1.wa.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Mark Lundquist" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <3AA44F83.87CB23B7@acm.org> <3AA48DE9.A0650F21@emw.ericsson.se> <3AA5E92D.8446E7AB@emw.ericsson.se> Subject: Re: Ada95 tutorials with sample code. X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: <11Ap6.524616$U46.15717819@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com> Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 00:05:17 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.20.66.55 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news1.sttls1.wa.home.com 984009917 24.20.66.55 (Wed, 07 Mar 2001 16:05:17 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 16:05:17 PST Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5528 Date: 2001-03-08T00:05:17+00:00 List-Id: Nice recap! Sven Nilsson wrote in message news:3AA5E92D.8446E7AB@emw.ericsson.se... > Howdy > > I'm replying to my own entry here to try and recap some of the things > thats been said. No flaming at all as far as I can see, thank you very > much people! I think this one has been flamed over so many times, everybody is just flamed out :-) > > Most people seem to agree that the use-clause can be a dangerous thing, I would not call it "danger". But I know what people mean who say that. Ultimately, there is no right answer to this. The reason is that what is signal to me may be noise to you, and vice-versa. That's the paradox of understandability: there are many classes of "readers" of code (familiarity level perhaps being the most important classification). Some packages are clearly written with the idea that clients "use" them, as evinced by the names chosen for declarations in the package (a classic example would be something like Ada.Strings.Unbounded). The idiom is that the name of the abstraction gets built in to identifier names instead of just being left in the package name, so you end up with "To_Unbounded_String" instead of something like "Create". I think the right guideline is, when you reference a package like this, "use" it as it was intended. The author wrote it in such a way that you should have no trouble figuring out where things are declared (and when in doubt, you can still use the qualfied name even though the package is on the "use" clause). Adhering to a "no use" rule for packages like this just seems silly. That said, I generally prefer not to write packages in the "meant to be use'd" style. Which does not mean that I never "use" those packages! I often do (but as you and others pointed out, not necessarily in the global use clause). Mark Lundquist Rational Software