From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 30 Jun 93 15:24:49 GMT From: sampson@cod.nosc.mil (Charles H. Sampson) Subject: Re: Ada Operators in 9x Message-ID: <1993Jun30.152449.7443@nosc.mil> List-Id: In article bevan@cs.man.ac.uk (Stephen J Bevan) writes: >In article <9306261803.aa04612@Paris.ics.uci.edu> kanderso@liege.ICS.UCI.EDU ( Kenneth Anderson) writes: > >Mike Feldman wrote: > > Suppose you _meant_ to write "q := 35;" but instead hit the shift > > key accidentally and wrote "Q := 35;" > > >Then you'd be doubly dumb. Once for declaring "q" and "Q" in the same > >block and twice for being sloppy about typing. > > You can't really mean the latter. A person is "dumb" if they make > a typing mistake? > >That's your inference, not my implication. Do you think it is a good >idea to define "Q" and "q" in the same block? ... How about this scenario? Q is declared in a package specification. The programmer declares q in a piece of code that uses that package. (The project is large enough that programmers are not expected to know all iden- tifiers in all package specifications; only those that are of interest to their area. This is the strength of the hierarchical declaration struc- ture.) If you dislike this example because it relies on the use clause, cast it in one of the contexts where the use clause is necessary. Another pos- sibility is declaring Q as a package regional identifier and q in a sepa- rately compiled subunit. If you dislike "Q" and "q", substitute any reasonable short project- specific identifier. Charlie