From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: casecrash: language lawyers: C'mon!
Date: 19 Jul 2001 14:37:22 -0700
Date: 2001-07-19T21:37:22+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0107191337.14b7a14a@posting.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 9j1cpn$bis$1@infosun2.rus.uni-stuttgart.de
Peter Hermann <ica2ph@iris16.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> wrote in message
news:<9j1cpn$bis$1@infosun2.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>...
GNAT says here:
casecrash.adb:6:02: "H" conflicts with declaration at line 2
> Why on earth should I accept this rule in this case?
Because, very deliberately, obverloading is restricted to function
and procedure names (enumeration literals are function names from
the point of view of this rule). We definitely do NOT want to allow
overloading of variable names, since it is impossible to see how this
could improve readability of programs. There is no excuse for reusing
H in the sample program you gave.
> Topic for Ada2005?
Nope. I see no reason for changing a well designed and well founded
rule here. This rule is clearly stated, and well understood by Ada
programmers. There is no basis for change.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-07-19 21:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-17 12:58 casecrash: language lawyers: C'mon! Peter Hermann
2001-07-18 3:43 ` John R. Strohm
2001-07-18 7:18 ` Martin Dowie
2001-07-18 9:36 ` Philip Anderson
2001-07-19 21:39 ` Robert Dewar
2001-07-19 21:37 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-07-18 9:09 Peter Hermann
2001-07-18 20:57 ` Tucker Taft
2001-07-19 8:57 ` Peter Hermann
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox