Re: ada writing guide

["Samuel T. Harris" <samuel_t_harris@Raytheon.com>]

"Jeffrey D. Cherry" wrote:
> 
> Robert Dewar wrote:
> >
> > I find the extra ); on its own line offensive and unnatural,
> > just as clear, and much easier on the eye to write
> >
> > >    procedure Foo
> > >       (D : in out Data;
> > >        C : in     Data);
> >
> > In GNAT we prefer to put things on a single line:
> >
> > >    procedure Foo (D : in out Data; C : Data);
> >
> > If they fit comfortably on one line, and use the form with
> > one line per parameter only if that is not the case.
> 
> I quite agree that if a complete declaration can appear on one
> line, it should not be arbitrarily broken up into two or more
> lines.  I also agree with the ");" looking silly when it's
> on a line by itself.  The part about "in" mode for parameters
> (not quoted above, but in the original post) I would also
> agree with, especially with function parameters.  Now
> here is where I stray ... just a bit.
> 
> I like the following form for a subprogram declaration:
> 
>     procedure Foo(
>        D : in out Data;
>        C : in     Data);
> 

I prefer ...

procedure foo
 (
  d : in out data; -- some meaningful comment about d.
  c : in     data  -- some meaningful comment about c.
 );

procedure foo
 (
  d : in out data;
  c : in     data
 )
is
  [declarations]
begin
  [statements]
end;

I find the extra white space around the parameter group
natural and appealing.

The comments about d and c in the subprogram specification
can naturally be about the contact (a la Eiffle) assumptions.

The comments about d and c in the subprogram body
can be about internal assumptions or design details.

-- 
Samuel T. Harris, Principal Engineer
Raytheon, Aerospace Engineering Services
"If you can make it, We can fake it!"