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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable 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 12:59:09 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!isdnet!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: "Beard, Frank" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: RE: constant string array Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 15:57:25 -0500 Organization: ENST, France Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 976654748 74862 137.194.161.2 (12 Dec 2000 20:59:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 20:59:08 +0000 (UTC) To: "'comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org'" Return-Path: X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta5 Precedence: bulk List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3010 Date: 2000-12-12T15:57:25-05:00 -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Carter [mailto:jrcarter@acm.org] I totally agree with you on the use of the boolean expression, as opposed to the "if" equivalent. I find it more rare than not, that the "if" version contributes anything significant to the clarity. > Such people frequently do other irritating things, > like putting unnecessary parentheses around the > condition of an if To me this is a non-issue. Use them, don't use them. Who cares? I don't care so long as they don't decrease readability. But, definitely use them if they increase readability, as in making precedence clearer, or dealing with compound statements containing multiple "or else" and "and then". Or should I say (or else) and (and then). :-) The powers that be that decided what style guide we were to follow (turned out to be a combination plus some of their own), decreed that for "if" statements, "thou shalt use parenthesis" to enclose the statement. As in "if () then", no matter what "()" contained. They wanted consistency and it wasn't worth arguing, because "if (success) then" is no harder to read than "if success then". Frank