Re: No Go To's Forever!

[kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <8bd9ve$r1c$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> writes:
> In article <8bbsl4$ani$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> In article <38D9233B.D51B16A3@cadence.com>,
>>
>> But surely you would enforce this usage with a tool. There are
>> no general defences against sufficiently incompetent
>> maintainers.
> 
> A tool? How would such a tool be written? It looks to me like you'd need
> an Ada parser to hook it to. Not everyone has the ability or permission
> to hack stuff like this into their compiler. Perhaps ASIS could help,
> but not every compiler supports ASIS.
> 
> And even if you did have the tool, how are you going to force
> maintainers to use it?

If I wanted to enforce use of a checking tool, I would put it into the
checkin mechanism.  Unless you are running in an environment where you
have terribly intertwined the source control and programming functions,
any mid-sized shop should not be permitting direct write-access to the
source code repository.  Programmers can check code in by using the
approved mechanism, but a COPY command will not do it.

If your code does not pass muster, it does not get checked in.

I am not offering an opinion on what the rules should be that
will be enforced, just on how to enforce them.