From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Conversion of Access Types Question
Date: 1999/01/21
Date: 1999-01-21T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <787d25$hq5$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: wccu2xmq6k3.fsf@world.std.com
In article <wccu2xmq6k3.fsf@world.std.com>,
Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com> wrote:
> It would have been better to simply make all access types
> behave like the "all" kind, and get rid of the "all"
> syntax.
Indeed, I agree. Meanwhile, it is not a bad idea at all
to routinely use ALL, and in particular, exported access
types from standard packages should usually have ALL.
You will notice that the standard RM packages generally
follow this rule.
A coding style rule that requires the use of ALL on *all*
access types is not at all unreasonable.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-01-21 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-01-14 0:00 Conversion of Access Types Question Paul S. Heidmann
1999-01-14 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-01-14 0:00 ` Paul S. Heidmann
1999-01-14 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-01-14 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-01-15 0:00 ` dewar
1999-01-20 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-01-20 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-01-20 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-01-21 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-01-27 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-01-28 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-01-21 0:00 ` robert_dewar [this message]
1999-01-21 0:00 ` Tom Moran
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox