From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Ragged Array Proposal
Date: 1999/09/28
Date: 1999-09-28T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7sr8ci$o8b$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 7sqo26$b5t$1@nnrp1.deja.com
In article <7sqo26$b5t$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> wrote:
> But that's not the issue here. We are talking about presenting
an
> example comparing the syntactic weight of the current approach
to that
> of a proposed approach. Unless you include the "use
> Ada.Strings.Unbounded;" statement in your example, then I
argue that you
> *must* write the example this way.
It is not a "trick" to use a USE clause here but just good
usage, and certainly not something unfamiliar to a C programmer
who would expect to use a #include for a header in a similar
situation.
If you like the "+" notation, then of course you would with
and use (or even use type :-) the package that defined and
reexported the adjusted string stuff. I can't imagine anyone
writing the fully expanded names here, so implying that this
is reasonable code is definitely misleading.
I do understand that some people operate in environments that
forbid USE clauses, but such environments which mandate the
use of a subset of Ada are not the source of inspiration about
what the best style is when using the *whole* Ada language.
Almost anything carried to extremes is a bad thing. Almost
everyone would agree that completely eliminating use clauses
or mandating their use everywhere would both be a bad idea.
So for most people we find a happy medium, and for most people
Ada.Strings.Unbounded.To_Unbounded_String
repeated over and over is not the way to do things!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-09-28 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <37e7c08e@eeyore.callnetuk.com>
1999-09-22 0:00 ` Ragged Array Proposal Ted Dennison
1999-09-22 0:00 ` Ray Blaak
1999-09-23 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-09-23 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-09-23 0:00 ` Hyman Rosen
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Hyman Rosen
1999-09-25 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-27 0:00 ` Hyman Rosen
1999-09-27 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1999-09-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Wes Groleau
1999-09-25 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-25 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-23 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-23 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1999-09-24 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-09-25 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-25 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-25 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-09-27 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-09-27 0:00 ` Pascal Obry
1999-09-28 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-09-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1999-09-29 0:00 ` Geoff Bull
1999-09-28 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox