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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!software.org!blakemor From: blakemor@software.org (Alex Blakemore) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: File name conventions for Ada units Message-ID: <1682@software.software.org> Date: 3 Oct 90 17:00:25 GMT References: <589@censun1.UUCP> <2190@sparko.gwu.edu> <2152@enea.se> Sender: news@software.org Reply-To: blakemore@software.org (Alex Blakemore) Organization: Software Productivity Consortium, Herndon, Virginia List-Id: In article <2152@enea.se> sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes: > Coming from the VMS world I find this strange. The normal file type for Ada > files is .ADA, and if you use it you have to tell that to the > compiler, but if you prefer .FOR you can do so. You mean if you follow the .Ada convention, you DON'T have to tell the compiler. I agree enforced file name suffixes are unreasonable. Even better, some systems (e.g. Rational) don't view source as files - you edit the actual library units. This problem never arises. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Alex Blakemore Internet: blakemore@software.org Software Productivity Consortium UUNET: ...!uunet!software!blakemore 2214 Rock Hill Rd, Herndon VA 22070 Bellnet: (703) 742-7125