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: 103376,7eaf9f2597de2259 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-11 19:29:50 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!sea-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: on package naming, should the word "_pkg" be part of it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20011011191946.K11745-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> References: <9q25ec0248o@drn.newsguy.com> <9q421v0bbg@drn.newsguy.com> <9q4a37$npd$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9q4e59018lm@drn.newsguy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 02:29:44 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.184.139.136 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: sea-read.news.verio.net 1002853784 206.184.139.136 (Fri, 12 Oct 2001 02:29:44 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 02:29:44 GMT Organization: Verio Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14356 Date: 2001-10-12T02:29:44+00:00 List-Id: On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Preben Randhol wrote: > Ada 95 on the other hand has a beautiful and clear syntax which I like > very much. Me too. > I like to read letters and numbers to a bunch of dots, > brackets, arrows etc... I understand that people from the C(++) and > likes doesn't at first like the somewhat more verbose syntax. I remember > I was not liking the Ada syntax at first as I thought it was like > Pascals (we had to use pascal at the university and I didn't like it as > it was a strict language where you still could crash the computer due to > the use of pointers.), but as I looked more at Ada source code I noticed > that it was so easy to read it and I found soon to prefer it to the > C(++) syntax. > > Syntax like ++ -- *= etc is junk which only leads to error in your > programs. No, that's not the problem at all. Adding syntax like +:= in Ada (influenced by Icon not C here :) would not compromise readability or lead to errors. I don't know why you think it would. > If writing: > > Counter := Counter + 1; > > is too long to write then simply make a macro in you editor so that you > can write: Counter++; Yuck! What's wrong with Increment or even Incr, written in straight Ada? You can even overload it to handle non-unit increment/decrement, and make a generic so it works over discrete types. I happpen to think +:= reads a little better, but really *very* little. > As for the .method notation there is a very good example in the link I > posted earlier. CLOS and Dylan also uses function notation, though clearly they are far more powerful than Ada in that they have multiple dispatch. -- Brian