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: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: morganpalaeo@peg.apc.org (Morgan Palaeo Associates) Subject: Re: Use use type? (Was Re: Safety-critical development in Ada and Eiffel) Date: 1997/07/24 Message-ID: <5r64cq$meh@peg.apc.org>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 258497059 Distribution: world References: Organization: Geological Consultants Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-07-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> Another pet peeve: In order to use Some_Package, you say "with >>> Some_Package;". >> >>I don't get it. Do you disagree with the choice of names for "with" and >>"use", with the fact that "use" doesn't implicitly "with", or something >>else altogether? > >The choice of names. "With" should be "use" or "uses" (the latter is >from UCSD Pascal, I think). "Use" should be I-don't-know-what, but >something other than "use". Then, when I say, "Package X uses package >Y", you wouldn't be confused as to whether I mean "Package X makes use >of package Y (i.e. X is a client of Y)", versus "There's a use_clause on >package X saying 'use Y'". And we avoid the verbing of "with", as in >"Package X withs package Y." (or is it "with's"?) which sounds horrible >in English. "To with" ain't a verb, in English. ;-) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use X; view X; -- Adrian Morgan