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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.42.212.207 with SMTP id gt15mr3755846icb.31.1409732602153; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 01:23:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.102.104 with SMTP id v95mr176965qge.6.1409732602013; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 01:23:22 -0700 (PDT) Path: border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!uq10no8789813igb.0!news-out.google.com!q8ni8qal.1!nntp.google.com!dc16no753644qab.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 01:23:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=75.178.36.13; posting-account=bDZo8goAAADwRO71ouDFRMCIZ96XBCK3 NNTP-Posting-Host: 75.178.36.13 References: <8fd27434-43c2-4bd1-b72b-dd7a0ef5af75@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <4407fc6e-a3a6-47d6-8f49-a5a0a1e8e0c4@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Is there a way to do large block of source code comments From: gdotone@gmail.com Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 08:23:22 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:188825 Date: 2014-09-03T01:23:21-07:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, September 3, 2014 2:29:33 AM UTC-4, Stefan...@uni-weimar.de wrote: > You don't need to agree with that decision by the Ada designers -- I am > not sure if I would agree with that either -- but you should understand > that it was something the Ada designers had carefully considered before, > very much unlike the Pascal example you gave, which was really an ad-hoc > decision, for the convenience of the compiler writer. > > Now, I actually think it would have been possible to have block comments > the Ada way (and is still possible for Ada 202X): Allow block comments > (I'd suggest Pascal's "(*" and "*)" for their brackets but that is a > matter of taste). Just prohibit nesting! I.e., any "(*" inside a block > comment is a syntax error. Conventional "--" comments are allowed, and any > "(*" and "*)" inside a conventional comment are allowed and ignored (i.e., > not treated as block comment brackets). > > This language feature would allow to easily comment out large program > parts without safety issues. But I doubt there is actually much demand for > that in the Ada community! > very good suggestion (* ... *) -* *-, {* ... *}, [- ... -], --| ... |--, -| ... |-, *| ... |*, it's just a matter of finding the Ada 202X way :-) perhaps, in 202X, there may be a way to include actual icons in the code as in apple's swift. we could end up with some nicely designed bookends to handle the job. g.