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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1a066a8221187698 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Norman H. Cohen" Subject: Frowining upon with clauses (was:Re: Environment Variables) Date: 1997/01/27 Message-ID: <32ECE7F8.35B@watson.ibm.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 212638844 references: <5c1nf9$d3q@ultranews.duc.auburn.edu> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: ncohen@watson.ibm.com newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) Date: 1997-01-27T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: John M. Greer wrote: > On an unrelated note (and this is a classroom question, but it's not > doing my homework for me), my professor commented that using WITH, though > common in Ada-83, is frowned upon by the industry in Ada 95. Any > specific reason for that? "Frowned upon" seems a bit overgeneral. Certainly there are packages that are most appropriately written as child packages in Ada 95, and in Ada 83 such packages would have had to been written as independent packages gain access to the facilities of the "parent package" through a with clause. -- Norman H. Cohen mailto:ncohen@watson.ibm.com http://www.research.ibm.com/people/n/ncohen