Ada naming conventions?

Ada naming conventions?

[Malcolm Edgar]

Our company is considering updating it's Ada coding standard, specifically 
naming standards, if you have any good standards you use I would love to hear
about them.

Thanks edgar :)   

Re: Ada naming conventions?

[Bob Crispen]

Malcolm Edgar <edgar@CS.UWA.OZ.AU> asks:

>Our company is considering updating it's Ada coding standard, specifically
>naming standards, if you have any good standards you use I would love to hear
>about them.

Ada Quality & Style, from

http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/docs/style-guide/

One there for Ada 95 and one for Ada 83.  Accept no substitutes.

Bob Crispen
revbob@eight-ball.hv.boeing.com
Speaking for myself, not my company

Re: Ada naming conventions?

[Michael F Brenner]

Re: Ada naming conventions?

[Ken Garlington]

Malcolm Edgar wrote:
> 
> Our company is considering updating it's Ada coding standard, specifically
> naming standards, if you have any good standards you use I would love to hear
> about them.

You might want to check out "Ada 95 Quality & Style" released by the SPC in
October 1995. Electronic copies are available from the Ada Information Clearinghouse
(contact adainfo@sw-eng.falls-church.va.us).

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"

Re: Ada naming conventions?

[Paul Williamson]

I agree fully with Bob and Ken , SPC guide is a must have/must follow
guide to such things. 

In over 6 years of working in and around Ada, 
I have found very few times this guide failed to
provide a terrific guide, it is well planned with the
rationale for each rule also well documented.

Re: Ada naming conventions?

[Robert Dewar]

Paul said

"I agree fully with Bob and Ken , SPC guide is a must have/must follow
guide to such things."

Fine, just so long as "must follow" means "must follow most of the time
when appropriate". These are after all guidelines and not absolute rules.
Often turning guidelines into absolute rules makes them harmful instead
of helpful. Of course this does not apply to simple layout rules, but the
SPC guide goes far beyond that.

Re: Ada naming conventions?

[Laurent Guerby]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII 17: 05:27 GMT, Size: 1202 bytes --]


Paul Williamson writes
: I agree fully with Bob and Ken , SPC guide is a must have/must follow
: guide to such things. 
: 
: In over 6 years of working in and around Ada, 
: I have found very few times this guide failed to
: provide a terrific guide, it is well planned with the
: rationale for each rule also well documented.

   A  bit more  on  the usefullness of  the  AQ&S, all  the rationales
provided are  a great deal  of information, and  not only  for Ada.  I
think that the reading (or    browsing, see AJPO site, the    document
itself is freely available) of the AQ&S should come really soon in the
process of  learning Ada,  at least  to give  some good  reference  on
portability/performance/comments, and as a   guide on how to  use  the
features of  Ada 95.   Completing  the   Lovelace tutorial  plus  some
experience in programming are  enough to have  a useful reading of the
Ada Quality & Style Guide.

-- 
--  Laurent Guerby, student at Telecom Bretagne (France), Team Ada.
--  "Use the Source, Luke. The Source will be with you, always (GPL)."
--  http://www-eleves.enst-bretagne.fr/~guerby/ (GATO Project).
--  Try GNAT, the GNU Ada 95 compiler (ftp://cs.nyu.edu/pub/gnat).

Re: Ada naming conventions?

[Ken Garlington]

Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> Paul said
> 
> "I agree fully with Bob and Ken , SPC guide is a must have/must follow
> guide to such things."

Just to clarify: I think all I said was "must have." I totally agree with
Dr. Dewar that when the _guide_book identifies a _guide_line, it really
does mean a _guide_line, not a requirement!

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"

Re: Ada naming conventions?

[Richard Riehle]

On 28 Apr 1996, Robert Dewar wrote:

> Paul said
>
> "I agree fully with Bob and Ken , SPC guide is a must have/must follow
> guide to such things."
>
> Fine, just so long as "must follow" means "must follow most of the time
> when appropriate". These are after all guidelines and not absolute rules.
> Often turning guidelines into absolute rules makes them harmful instead
> of helpful. Of course this does not apply to simple layout rules, but the
> SPC guide goes far beyond that.

  This is one of the rare occasions where I am in full agreement with
  the emminent Dr. Dewar.

  In a 1964 issue of THINK Magazine, an IBM publication, some anonymous
  person on the editorial staff wrote, "The last act of a dying
  organization is to enlarge the rule book."  Guidelines such as those
  in the Ada Quality and Style Guide are useful as long as they are
  not treated as "revealed truth," and kill the effectivness of the
  solution being sought.

  Someone in one of my Ada classes for a defense contractor once asked,
  "Why is it that the people who make up new rules for programmers are
  people who no longer write programs?

  Richard Riehle