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=2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_DATE,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!LLL-ICDC.ARPA!pearson%bud.DECnet
From: pearson%bud.DECnet@LLL-ICDC.ARPA ("BUD::PEARSON")
Newsgroups: net.lang.ada
Subject: Question on Ada style.
Message-ID: <8611020212.AA29911@ucbvax.berkeley.edu>
Date: Thu, 30-Oct-86 12:46:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8611020212.AA29911
Posted: Thu Oct 30 12:46:00 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 3-Nov-86 22:28:17 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: "BUD::PEARSON" <pearson%bud.decnet@lll-icdc.arpa>
Organization: The ARPA Internet
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


    A few coworkers and I have noticed something odd happening to the
Ada programs we write: more and more often, the top-level ("main")
procedure turns out to "do nothing itself".  It ends with

                  begin
                     null;
                  end;

while the "real work" is done by generic packages instantiated
in its declarative part.
    Have we wandered off the path of righteousness? or is THIS the
path of righteousness? Is there a cogent (preferably bumper-sticker-
sized) explanation why it SHOULD be this way, that we can give the
old, conservative guy across the trailer, who suspects that we've been
seduced by a fascination for the arcane subtleties of the Ada language?

  -  Peter
(pearson%anchor.decnet@lll-icdc.arpa)
------