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,ec4cde5d799065b6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <wwgrol@pseserv3.fw.hac.com>
Subject: Re: Coding Standards
Date: 1997/09/23
Message-ID: <34280A17.748F@pseserv3.fw.hac.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 274933717
Sender: usenet@most.fw.hac.com (News Administration)
References: <01bcc32e$350b5ba0$6409868b@gateway> <5vqm61$fu2$1@cf01.edf.fr>
 <dewar.874665174@merv> <3422F037.41CA@lmco.com> <3423AF1B.5152@i.b.m.net>
 <dewar.874848062@merv> <3426B51E.7296@lmco.com>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: sparc02
Organization: Hughes Defense Communications
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-09-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Here we have what at first glance might appear to be a mixture of
"absolute rules" and "merely advice" but in reality the difference
is how hard it is to get a deviation approved.  Even in cases where
no one ever disapproves, the "merely advice" may be valuable for
educating the inexperienced.

The task that is apparently facing William Dale can best be solved
with a single absolute rule:  Code that will not compile is not
acceptable.