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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,8307cd6ac3cbcb04,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Dr. Robert Leif" Subject: Reducing Carpel Tunnel Syndrome Date: 1997/02/07 Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970207143945.006d6b8c@mail.4dcomm.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 215185016 sender: Ada programming language x-sender: rleif@mail.4dcomm.com comments: To: Robert A Duff content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: 1997-02-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: To: Bob Duff et al. From: Bob Leif I was trying to emphasize that the information for named notation is present in the program. Since I am a very firm believer in named notation, I employ it as the default. In Ada 83, I keep all of my numeric types in a package Num_Types. I tend to with and use this package because it makes math functions more readable. Since Ada 95 permits the use of a type, one can have the pretty printer ignore these. Or to argue by analogy, which is not always correct, a smart pretty printer is equivalent to a grammar checker. The pretty printer would be configured according to the organization's style guide and could take a pragma No_Named_Notation. For changing to named notation, I can not resist Pragma No_Use. The system does not have to be perfect. All it needs to do is be accurate enough to significantly reduce human typing. In the case of code obtained from archives, the new user would have both the old and new version to merge. Providing the system was about 90% correct in selecting which positional arguments to change to named notation, one would come out ahead. In fact, the tool might just be used to facilitate understanding of some difficult sections of code. In short, tools to be useful need NOT be perfect. I will be on travel for the next two weeks. You wrote ________________________________________________ It took me a few minutes to "get it". :-) I don't see how a tool can decide whether to make a call named or positional. For some procedures named is more readable, and for some, positional is more readable. And for some, a mixture is more readable. To automate this, you would need to mark each procedure declaration somehow. - Bob ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- Bob Leif Robert C. Leif, Ph.D., PMIAC, Vice President & Research Director Ada_Med, A Division of Newport Instruments Tel. & Fax (619) 582-0437 Please send e-mail to my new address, rleif@rleif.com Thank you.