Re: Problems with visibility of implicit function...

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

In article <4q6tgq$n25@uuneo.neosoft.com>,  <progers@acm.org> wrote:
>>Dale Stanbrough (dale@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU) wrote:
>>
>[snip]
>>
>> BTW WRT Annotated LRM, 8.5.4(8.g), what do alligators have to
>> do with squirrels?  ?:-)

They're both animals.

This is all just a bit of silliness on my part.  One gets tired of
writing all that serious and arcane stuff that goes into an
International Standard.  And producing a good index is long and tedious
work.  The user of an index just looks things up, but the author has to
*read* it, from start to finish, numerous times.

During the design of Ada 9X, one of the reviewers (I think it was Dave
Emery) sent in a comment saying that if alligators are included in the
index, then in fairness to squirrels, they should be included, too
(since the AARM does, in fact, use the word "squirrel").  So I obeyed
this suggestion.

>For that matter, you've missed the ecology index entries...  Go look up
>"unpolluted" :)

Right.  That one should be self-explanatory, and is equally silly.  It
was also triggered by a comment from a reviewer (I think it was Norman
Cohen, master of puns).

In case anybody wants to know what on earth I'm babbling about, just
look up the following terms in the Index of the RM:

    constructor
    heap management
    unpolluted

and in the index of the AARM:

    squirrel away

- Bob