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,FREEMAIL_FROM, 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: 2002-03-06 09:08:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.tufts.edu!newstransit.mitre.org!cambridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3C864CE1.B1D5697B@despammed.com> From: Wes Groleau Reply-To: wesgroleau@despammed.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,es-MX,es,pt,fr-CA,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Future with Ada References: <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> <3C7E7CAD.7070504@mail.com> <3C7FB9D2.D9C6E055@boeing.com> <3C81DF1F.9000503@mail.com> <3C83A112.6080302@mail.com> <3C84223C.A356F466@adaworks.com> <3C853A04.34826F39@despammed.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 12:07:45 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.168.144.162 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1015434484 151.168.144.162 (Wed, 06 Mar 2002 11:08:04 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 11:08:04 CST Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20870 Date: 2002-03-06T12:07:45-05:00 List-Id: > Why not allow the labeling of all structures that have an "end"? You can > name a loop with a label and it helps find which "end" you mean if you've > got nested loops. Same with declare blocks. Why not for "if" statements and > "case" statements? Maybe also records - but the record already has a name > and aren't nested so it would probably look inconsistent. I think it's a great idea, and I can't think of any drawbacks. if, case, select, accept, task, loop, block. Records, too, only for them, use the record type name. In places that currently require a reserved word after the 'end,' make it optional and allow the label instead. Let me go a step further: Some houses have style requirements to comment 'begin' and 'exception' with the name of the level of scope. Why not have an optional identifier after 'begin' or 'exception' which is checked by the compiler. Same rules as the corresponding 'end.' Possibly require a colon IF it makes it look better procedure X is -- pages of declarations begin X: -- compiler would reject any other name, -- thereby proofing nesting level [statement] .... This is a little more complicated than the end issue, because you would not want to allow Label: begin Label but you would want to allow Label: declare -- lots of stuff begin Label -- Wes Groleau http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau