Re: on package naming, should the word "_pkg" be part of it?

[Robert*@ <Robert_member@newsguy.com>]

In article <mailman.1002721517.7620.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>, "M. says...
>
 
>
>Yes, Ada 95 class idiom is a bit hard, but it is ok: perhaps it is better
>to leave it as it is and use other software engineering items e.g. UML to
>do the OO modeling and generate Ada automatically from this.
>

But why should I install UML on my linux box just to programin Ada? this is
more obstcles to using Ada. very few will us Ada then, less than now.

>Personally I prefer Method(Object). I just agree that both syntaxes should
>be there, if possible; and if not, stay with Method(Object) ;-)
>
 
But Method(parameters...) is not in the true spirit of OO. (yes, it is
syntax only, but syntax is important in how one thinks of things).

notice how Ada is more prodcedural in its thinking: gnathtml will generate
documentation of the code, listing all the 'files' and the 'functions' and
'procedures' in the code. Javadoc will generate documentations listing all
the 'packages' and 'classes' and 'interfaces' in the code.

So even the ada documentation is procedural oriented.


I am really interesed in seeing the objects in the code, not the functions
and procedures.