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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e3f2eac5c026e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-30 10:03:14 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: prichtmyer@yahoo.com (Peter Richtmyer) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Other Ada Standards (was Re: SIGada Conference) Date: 30 Dec 2003 10:03:13 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1b585154.0312301003.4f868eb8@posting.google.com> References: <468D78E4EE5C6A4093A4C00F29DF513D04B82B08@VS2.hdi.tvcabo> <3FEA5C82.8050309@noplace.com> <3FEB047A.1040100@noplace.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 155.104.239.16 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1072807393 8730 127.0.0.1 (30 Dec 2003 18:03:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:03:13 +0000 (UTC) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3955 Date: 2003-12-30T10:03:13-08:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote in message news:... > > That would defeat the whole purpose of with_clauses. The point of > with's is that you can see a summary of the interconnections between > compilation units all in one spot, right up front. > I wish this were true! Just look in one place. However, take a not-too-unusual situation of a package spec and body with a few "separate" routines, and perhaps some child packages with a few separates each. "Good practice" says put the with's down where needed, not all in the pkg spec. So in a child pkg separate, you need to look in up to 5 different files to see what might be used (with'd) by the separate. For the entire package, you need to look at all the files to see what all the "interconnections" are. Or do you advocate putting them all in the spec? (I remember an engineer took over a pgm of mine once. First thing she did was move all the with's into the package specs. Then she complained to me that my program would not compile and she had to spend alot of time redesigning and recoding it.) (It was already working). regards, Peter