Re: some questions re. Ada/GNAT from a C++/GCC user

[bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)]

In article <4jhe1v$m0g@dayuc.dayton.saic.com>,
John G. Volan  <John_Volan@ccmail.dayton.saic.com> wrote:
>A C programmer would complain about having to introduce an extra
>begin/end block in order to introduce variables.  Isn't the scope
>of a variable well-defined in C, even without this extra baggage?
>It just extends from the declaration to the end of whatever block
>you're already in.

Well, at least one Ada programmer (namely, me) would agree with the C
programmer in this case.

>An Ada programmer would counter that, in Ada, some variables might be
>instances of _task_ types. ...

Sorry to keep disagreeing with you, John, but this seems like the tail
wagging the dog.  If the reason I'm required to add 3 extra junk lines
of code, just to declare a simple variable, is because of tasks, then
that's just poor language design.  If you need a place to activate the
tasks, fine, put in an "Activate_Tasks_Here" statement.  Don't
complicate the job for some poor guy who has no tasks, and just wants to
declare an Integer or String variable.

- Bob