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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,808505c9db7d5613
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: mfb@mbunix.mitre.org (Michael F Brenner)
Subject: Re: Looking for good Ada95 book
Date: 1996/11/04
Message-ID: <55kmtp$3s3@top.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 194300512
references: <32723F6A.54A3@dtek.chalmers.se> <dewar.846630258@merv>
 <55955a$n04@felix.seas.gwu.edu> <dewar.846952540@merv>
organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford Mass.
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-11-04T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


    > With Ada 95, we have something approaching a real consensus on style (use
    > lower case for keywords and Capitalized_Identifiers_With_Underscores). I
    > think this consensus is valuable for the community,

I was not asked what my opinion was before forming this imaginary
consensus, and I feel that we should reject all nonsense standards
such as capitalization that take time away from making a program
semantically correct (solving the problem correctly) and making
it efficient. If a standard is going to become a consensus, it 
should capitalize like almost all languages on Earth that have
capitals do: only acronyms and the first letter of each computer
program are capitals, all others are small letters. But most 
importantly, do not make standards without the consent of the 
victims who will be subjected to the tyrrany of those standards. 
If I am not permitted input into the process, then the process
Must not be construed to effect me.