Re: Ideas for Ada 200X

["Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@attbi.com>]

Vinzent Hoefler wrote:
> Steve wrote:
>>but I have had problems
>>distinguishing:
>>
>>shiftTally(shift)(dayOfWeek(month).tallyIndex)
>>.sortTally(s).nbRejects :=
>>shiftTally(shift)(dayOfWeekmonth).tallyIndex).sortTally(s).nbRejects + 1;
>>
>>from
>>
>>shiftTally(shift)(dayOfWeek(month).tallyIndex)
>>.sortTally(s).nbRejects :=
>>shiftTally(shift)(dayOfWeekmonth).tallyIndex).sortTally(t).nbRejects + 1;
>>
>>You might argue that the code was not written well.  I don't know about you
>>but I don't generally re-write blocks of code I'm maintaining just because
>>it doesn't look nice.
> 
> I do. :-) I don't want the one who might come after me, going through
> the same shit again.

Amen!  In my case, that code would never even hit the compiler.

Rejects: Integer renames 
shiftTally(shift)(dayOfWeek(month).tallyIndex).sortTally(s).nbRejects;
...
Rejects := Rejects + 1;

might.  Or it might be:

Current: Some_Record_Type renames 
shiftTally(shift)(dayOfWeek(month).tallyIndex).sortTally(s);
...
Current.nbRejects := Current.nbRejects + 1;

or it might be that the operation of incrementing the number of rejects 
gets wrapped in an (inlined) procedure.  It all depends on what makes 
the logic most visible.  In this case the question that jumps out once 
you have done the clean-up should be "Should the increment always be 1?" 
not "What is this mess?"