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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,577df5d4a0e88785 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-12-12 16:50:16 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!sienna.impulse.net!newsxfer.interpacket.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.mathworks.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail From: Robert Dewar Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: RE: constant string array Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 00:36:09 GMT Organization: Deja.com Message-ID: <916g9q$dnd$1@nnrp1.deja.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.240 X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Dec 13 00:36:09 2000 GMT X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (OS/2; I) X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x73.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.240 X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3027 Date: 2000-12-13T00:36:09+00:00 List-Id: In article , comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org wrote: > As in "if () then", no matter what "()" contained. Well the () are useless noise REGARDLESS of what they enclose since there is no precedence issues etc in this case. > They wanted consistency and it wasn't worth arguing, > because "if (success) then" is no harder to read than > "if success then" There is no more justification for this than a silly rule that requires all right hand sides to be in parentheses. The argument could equally well be that a := (success); is no harder to read then a := success; The fact of the matter is that these noise parens which have no function are entirely unnecessary, and coding standards that require them are entirely misguided. In my experience, the ONLY reason for the illogical decision to use these in IF statements (and not for example in assignment statements) is that people are used to syntaxes of other languages -- never a good source of clear thinking in deciding good style in an unrelated language! As for the use-them, don't-use-them, who-cares, philosophy, I find this a very sloppy view to the important issue of coding style consistency. > > Frank > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/