Re: 'with'ing and 'use'ing

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>]

In article <38BD80CD.4462065@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com>,
  Wes Groleau <wwgrol@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> wrote:
> > [Ada.Strings.Unbounded.Unbounded_String is] actually exhibit
A
> > for the kind of thing I'm complaining about. How
> > do the authors of that package know that I have a system
where its
> > appropriate to perform "use"s?
>
> Or why do they assume you don't work in a shop that
> labels "use" a mortal sin?
>
> These shops exist, and though I disagree with their
> attitude, I think it was inappropriate for the 9X designers
> to force them to choose between their religion
> and readability.
>
> (Or to force employees of such a shop to choose between
> the boss's rules and readability.)
>
> Revision suggestion (yes, I know this is the wrong address):
> We're stuck with these redundant names, since some are already
> in use.  But next revision, packages like unbounded could, via
> 'renames,' provide alternate names that won't look stupid
> in an anti-use shop.


The design of the Ada language assumes that you use the entire
language. If you choose to subset the language, some adjustments
may need to be made, but since3 you chose to do the
subsetting, it is up to you to undo the damage, if any,
caused by that.

If you have banned use clauses, then yes, the otherwise nicely
chosen names in Ada.Strings.Unbounded will be annoying, so it
is up to you provide a package with renamings that match your
particular restrictive usage and rules.

It is unreasonable to ask that the RM anticipate all such
ill-advised subsetting rules, and somehow compensate for
them in advance.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.