Trivia: Ada packages are great!

[Olivier Henley <olivier.henley@gmail.com>]

Hey,

These days, at my job, I integrate the C++ work of a colleague into a bigger product. 

Developing alone, for months, he chose convenient name for his classes.  Because they are not mandatory in C++ and because he did not need it, he did not used namespaces. Fair.

What do you think happened when moving the code into a MUCH larger C++ code base? It clashed, and a lot. It took hours to stitch things together, even adding a 'hacky halfbaked' namespace to lift the ambiguity.   

I just want to recall that in Ada being forced to choose a package name for our units is a frustration/time/clarity saver. Integrating would have taken nothing. 

Anyone arguing that enforcing explicit separation of code units is a waste of time or tutoring for bad programmers is plain wrong. 

This is one of the many reasons why Ada, in the long run, kills it. 

ohenley