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: 2002-03-09 08:41:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr15.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3C8A3BC8.4EE1A67B@flash.net> From: Gary Scott Reply-To: scottg@flash.net Organization: Home X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en]C-DIAL (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: named control statements (was: 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> <3C8A2249.E7B0D7E5@flash.net> <3C8A301F.7BD6D2C@despammed.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.48.222.18 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr15.news.prodigy.com 1015692026 ST000 64.48.222.18 (Sat, 09 Mar 2002 11:40:26 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2002 11:40:26 EST X-UserInfo1: SCSYQNONF[^M@LX_ICCHOPP@FJ^ZTB\MV@BZMVMHQAVTUZ]CLNTCPFK[WDXDHV[K^FCGJCJLPF_D_NCC@FUG^Q\DINVAXSLIFXYJSSCCALP@PB@\OS@BITWAH\CQZKJMMD^SJA^NXA\GVLSRBD^M_NW_F[YLVTWIGAXAQBOATKBBQRXECDFDMQ\DZFUE@\JM Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2002 16:40:26 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20981 Date: 2002-03-09T16:40:26+00:00 List-Id: Wes Groleau wrote: > > > > Would it be attractive to be able to do something like: > > > > > > Outer_Check: if (Some_Boolean) then > > > Inner_Check: if (Some_Other_Boolean) then > > > Some_Statement ; > > > end if Inner_Check ; > > > end if Outer_Check ; > > > > Hmmm, looks exactly like Fortran 95...(except ; is optional) > > That's OK. Nothing wrong with borrowing a good idea > from another language. Others have been borrowing good > ideas from Ada for almost twenty years..... Nope, that's the argument I use promoting Fortran 95...I say "it's got all this nice stuff borrowed from Ada and Modula now, you should try it"...still, I can't for the life of me understand why "implicit none" wasn't made the default when free form source form was formally standardized over a decade ago. Some compromises for backward compatibility should simply not be made. > > -- > Wes Groleau > http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau -- Gary Scott mailto:scottg@flash.net mailto:webmaster@fortranlib.com http://www.fortranlib.com Support the GNU Fortran G95 Project: http://g95.sourceforge.net