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,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c63aa81a67eceb8f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Ragged Array Proposal
Date: 1999/09/28
Message-ID: <7sr8ci$o8b$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 530242100
References: <37e7c08e@eeyore.callnetuk.com> <37EA9A72.594ED8F5@mitre.org>
 <37ebb120@eeyore.callnetuk.com> <7so0i4$d8j$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <01bf0919$67bbb350$022a6282@dieppe> <7sqo26$b5t$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x29.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Sep 28 20:28:17 1999 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-09-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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.