From: dennison@telepath.com (Ted Dennison)
Subject: Re: Safe "use" directive
Date: 11 Nov 2002 06:44:36 -0800
Date: 2002-11-11T14:44:36+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4519e058.0211110644.447ef8ac@posting.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3dcba716$0$305$bed64819@news.gradwell.net
porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) wrote in message news:<3dcba716$0$305$bed64819@news.gradwell.net>...
> Use "use X" directive for a package X only if the package meets the
> following criteria:
(5 line sentence deleted)
> P.S. For packages not following this rule (e.g. some Ada.*), it is
> possible to create wrapper packages following the rule.
%-(
Wouldn't it be far simpler to just not do the "use"?
> Do you agree that it is a good rule? (Don't say: never use "use",
> I am only about the case if one uses "use".)
Sorry, but I don't agree. Once you let in the possibility that there
could be "use"s clouding things, then when something is going wrong
the maintainer *has* to go check all those other packages. He can't
count on the non-compiler enforced parts of the rules having been
followed (after all, *something* is wrong somewhere, or there wouldn't
be a problem). I'd say this is marginally better than putting no
restrictions on uses, but just marginally.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-11 14:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-08 11:53 Safe "use" directive Victor Porton
2002-11-08 17:18 ` Peter Richtmyer
2002-11-09 10:36 ` Gautier
2002-11-11 14:44 ` Ted Dennison [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-11-12 22:03 Gautier direct_replies_not_read
2002-11-18 1:57 ` Richard Riehle
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox