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-Thread: 103376,429176cb92b1b825
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!87.79.20.105.MISMATCH!news.netcologne.de!ramfeed1.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 11:04:55 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101129 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: AWS Coding Styles (and about boring plain-linear text files in
 the end)
References: <op.vpfsjkfdule2fv@garhos>
 <24418fa4-8843-4fe6-8c2f-026ea6009b68@g26g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>
 <87lj2ido9j.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <4D35F6C8.2060100@obry.net>
 <4d3608ab$0$7664$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <ih539t$7e4$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <4d3634a5$0$7664$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <op.vpi6pgmlule2fv@garhos>
In-Reply-To: <op.vpi6pgmlule2fv@garhos>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <4d36b748$0$6977$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Jan 2011 11:04:56 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5f8c9fbf.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=O>l`BkZi]N:gP]QSEBQ^d44IUK<Cl32<14Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;VP?0TCfN=k5PCY\c7>ejV8YUcQ_Y3?jU18SoWhBA4C@1
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16551
Date: 2011-01-19T11:04:56+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 1/19/11 2:06 AM, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote:
> Le Wed, 19 Jan 2011 01:47:33 +0100, Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de> a écrit:

>> The comment specifically mentions the formal argument name,
>> as should be. However, the comment does depend on the name of
>> things.
> So this turn to be a suggestion about the good way to name program elements ?

Following the particular AWS rule, the formal argument name
should be mentioned, but not otherwise matter much.  IIUC.  The
comment then can perhaps be written


    procedure Call (Frmbloo : String);
    --  @{Frmbloo@} is an absolute name of an executable file
    --  to be called


(Regarding the comment markup, I first thought "{{Frmbloo}}";
however, mathematical sets, very useful in comments, can have
sets as elements, "{{" becomes ambigous".  "{{" might be too
similar to "((", too, the latter being valid Ada source text.
The @{ @} construct, sufficiently unique yet simple, can bracket
inline Ada source of any kind; "@@" (or some another pair)
will---if needed---provide for line-wise switching
complementing "--" and eases the writing of coding examples in
comments.  The comments can then be checked by compilers and
tools.

(If programmers didn't suffer from Unicode phobia, the language
designers could pick symbols for bracketing not otherwise used
such as right and left pointing triangles.  Alas, digraphs rule...)