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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,900edaa189af2033
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Ada95 OOP Questions
Date: 1996/08/08
Message-ID: <Dvu145.92@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 172993606
references: <dewar.839329517@schonberg> <4u7h1r$jrn@mailsrv2.erno.de>
 <DvqIFo.LB8@world.std.com> <dewar.839457355@schonberg>
organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-08-08T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <dewar.839457355@schonberg>, Robert Dewar <dewar@cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
>OK, sorry, I thought the definition was clear. To me style rules are rules
>that are placed ON TOP of the language rules, so a language rule is not
>by definition a style rule. To me if a style rule is arguably reasonable
>as an absolute rule, rather than a guideline, it should have been an
>enforced language rule ...

Agreed.  But the language designers can't think of everything, so it may
well be that there some rules that really should be absolute, and yet
didn't get into the language.  I can't think of any at the moment (in
the case of Ada 95).  ;-)

And there are certainly some rules that *are* in the language, which
ought to have been non-absolute style rules.  I can think of a few, but
I fear it would start another pointless argument to mention them.  ;-)

>... -- of course this rule itself is more of a 
>guideline :-)

Indeed.

- Bob