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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,92c39a3be0a7f17d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-04 17:35:09 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsfeed0.news.atl.earthlink.net!news.atl.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail
From: Richard Riehle <richard@adaworks.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Future with Ada
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 17:41:16 -0800
Organization: AdaWorks Software Engineering
Message-ID: <3C84223C.A356F466@adaworks.com>
References: <mailman.1005328653.20306.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <3wdH7.20135$xS6.32614@www.newsranger.com> <9tqete0gqc@drn.newsguy.com>
 <3C0924D6.2B5A3087@adaworks.com>
 <250220022121494455%thehouseofcards@remove.this.part.mac.com>
 <3C7B0B13.3080003@worldnet.att.net> <3C7D1C89.2000803@home.com>
 <mailman.1014918362.4599.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <3C7E7CAD.7070504@mail.com> <3C7FB9D2.D9C6E055@boeing.com>
 <3C81DF1F.9000503@mail.com> <a5tmpv$aek$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>
 <3C83A112.6080302@mail.com>
Reply-To: richard@adaworks.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9e.fc.cc.eb
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Server-Date: 5 Mar 2002 01:34:09 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20794
Date: 2002-03-05T01:34:09+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hyman Rosen wrote:

> Chad R. Meiners wrote:
> > The problem is that they do not make good teaching material without the
> > accompaniment of an introduction and explanation.
>
> I find it difficult to believe that { } needs an introduction and
> explanation that begin/end or if/end do not. On the other hand,
> braces are light and airy and nicely set off and separate pieces
> of program text which are more wordy, guiding the eye towards seeing
> the structure of the code.
>
> It's a religious issue, and a matter of taste. How many times, after
> all, has this topic been discussed in the past?

Actually, curly braces would not be so bad if the C/C++/Java compilers
were able to detect a name at the end of them.   For example,

                  LabelName:       {

                                                    source code

                                           } LabelName

One reason I prefer Ada to the C family of languages is that the compiler
allows me to document my code blocks with names and actually checks
that the block I started corresponds to the name with which I ended it. Of
course, this is probably a religious issue and has very little to recommend
it
as a model for self-documenting code.

Richard Riehle