Re: Some questions about Ada.

[Laurent.Guerby@enst-bretagne.fr (Laurent Guerby)]

Robert A Duff writes
: In article <DqrD2C.Jyr@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>,
[deleted]
: Ada/Modula-3 way is better.  Some think the C++/Smalltalk way is better.
                                                  ^^^^^^^^^

   Do you mean Eiffel here ? I don't  see C++ closer to Smalltalk than
Ada or Modula-3, in fact, Smalltalk is very close to Smalltalk ;-).

: >Second, I've been wondering why Ada is case-insensitive. I'm aware that Ada
: >was very carefully designed, so I'm thinking there must be some reason it
: >was made case-insensitive rather than case-sensitive, but I can't imagine
: >what that reason could be.
[deleted]
: The problem with case sensitivity, is that you can define two things i
: and I that are different variables, and that makes code less readable.
: The problem with case INsensitivity, is that you can define a variable
: I, and refer to it as i, and that makes code less readable.  IMHO, the
: "right" solution is neither one.  How about this rule:
: 
:     Overload resolution is performed in a case INsensitive manner.
: 
:     AFTER overload resolution, a legality rule is that each reference
:     to something has to use the same case as the declaration.
: 
:     And, oh, by the way, make everything overloadable, not just
:     subprogram names.
: 
: ?

   Note that  the GNAT  style  switch works exactly   this way  (if  I
remember well), and consider casing inconsistency as a fatal error.

-- 
--  Laurent Guerby, student at Telecom Bretagne (France), Team Ada.
--  "Use the Source, Luke. The Source will be with you, always (GPL)."
--  http://www-eleves.enst-bretagne.fr/~guerby/ (GATO Project).
--  Try GNAT, the GNU Ada 95 compiler (ftp://cs.nyu.edu/pub/gnat).