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: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
From: leew@micrologic.com (Lee Webber)
Subject: Re: Interface/Implementation (was Re: Design by Contract)
Date: 1997/09/11
Message-ID: <3417f99f.1904249@wizard.pn.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 271600392
References: <EG9y0E.C65@syd.csa.com.au> <EGAqKI.GsE.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
 <mheaney-ya023680001009970904100001@news.ni.net>
Organization: Pioneer Global
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 1997-09-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


On Wed, 10 Sep 1997 09:04:10 -0800, mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney)
wrote:

>
>In article <EGAqKI.GsE.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>,
>stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) wrote:
>
>
>>This may be a practice-versus-capability issue again.  There is
>>nothing precluding the use of separate declarations, even if the
>>subprogram is local to the body.  One typical coding style adopted
>>for Ada package bodies is:
>>
>>     <declarations of local subprograms>
>>
>>     <bodies for visible subprograms>
>>
>>     <bodies for local subprograms>
>>
>>Given this style, the bodies can be ordered in any way that is convenient.
>
>Funny, I didn't understand Don's comment, because I thought that everyone
>already did this.

Patrick Doyle already said the below in one sentence, but I thought I
might put a little more mustard on it:

   So Ada imposes dependency ordering that makes people list their
   subprograms bottom-up, but everybody defeats this by means of
   forward declarations and lists things top-down because everybody
   knows that's the more natural way to read a program.  Does anyone
   see an element of the bizarre in this?

   I've programmed extensively in Modula-2 and Pascal, and I always
   thought it was a misfeature that I had to put the main program at
   the bottom.  (Not so true for initialization code for other
   than the main module.)  I've even gone so far as to put all the
   detail in a subroutine and make the entire main program a call
   to that routine, just to get it at the top of the source.