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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e3f2eac5c026e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-24 05:17:30 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!d9c68f36!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3FE991DD.5060301@noplace.com> From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (OEM-HPQ-PRS1C03) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Other Ada Standards (was Re: SIGada Conference) References: <468D78E4EE5C6A4093A4C00F29DF513D04B82B08@VS2.hdi.tvcabo> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 13:17:29 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.26.78 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net 1072271849 209.165.26.78 (Wed, 24 Dec 2003 05:17:29 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 05:17:29 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3779 Date: 2003-12-24T13:17:29+00:00 List-Id: I'd bet that new reserved words are right out. Breaks upward compatibility of old code and all that. Although if one is looking for a variant on "with and use" that would be a good choice. If it were possible to go adding new reserved words, how about: library Ada ; Giving the equivalent of a "with" for everything in the tree Ada... But then someone would want: use library Ada ; and want it to imply a with of everything under Ada as well as a use, and we're back to that whole thing... Now I've just thrown a turd in the punchbowl, havn't I? ;-) I think its all a tempest in a teapot. While there might be some small convenience in some version of a "with and use", I don't see this as something that is either fundamentally broken, adding some new major and important capability or otherwise making the language significantly more attractive to the non-Ada crowd. The time spent implementing and verifying it could be better spent by adding new sublibraries to Ada that gave the user more leverage. Which would people rather have: with and use My_Homegrown_Library_For_Tough_To_Get_Right_Math_Ops ; or with Ada.New_Math_Ops_Extensions_For_2005 ; use Ada.New_Math_Ops_Extensions_For_2005 ; Personally, I'd rather have to type two lines of code (over and over again, if necessary) than to develop my own matrix math, stats package, operations research math, etc. Providing a bunch of pre-packaged math libraries with Ada would have the advantage of a) being relatively easy to specify and test, b) fairly straightforward to implement without hurting the compiler, and c) likely to make the language more attractive to people who have to do complicated math. Providing a "with and use" or "use implies with" is likely to a) be tricky to get right without breaking something, b) require fundamental changes to the compiler and c) not likely to make that many people thrilled to be using Ada. I'd say "no brainer" but that's just me. :-) MDC Chad R. Meiners wrote: > > How about > > see Ada.Text_IO; -- ;-) > > Procedure Hello_World is > begin > Put_Line("Hello World."); > end Hello_World; > > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "Face it ladies, its not the dress that makes you look fat. Its the FAT that makes you look fat." -- Al Bundy ======================================================================