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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f51e93dacd9c7fca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-18 19:19:19 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn1feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.204!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "SteveD" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: status of Ada STL? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.225.227.101 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net 1024453157 12.225.227.101 (Wed, 19 Jun 2002 02:19:17 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 02:19:17 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 02:19:17 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26337 Date: 2002-06-19T02:19:17+00:00 List-Id: "Robert A Duff" wrote in message news:wccptyozndh.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com... > "SteveD" writes: > > > If you look at type definitions you have: > > > > type mytype is > > record > > ... > > end record; > > I wish it were "end My_Type", instead of "end record", > especially when the record contains 10 lines of components, > and 30 lines of comments. Me too. I suppose the language could be changed to permit the name of the record following end record that is "end record My_Type" and require that the name of the record match the name at the end if present. > > I would much prefer: > > type mytype is abstract tagged > > record > > null; > > end record > > methods > > procedure MyProc1( value : mytype ); > > end methods; > > Not an entirely unreasonable complaint, but I don't think the above > would work very well. At least it raises questions: Where would you > put the class-wide ops? Where would you put the exceptions and generics > that are "related" to mytype but not primitive? I'm sure these details could be worked out. I wasn't suggesting a specific syntax, just suggesting that the bounds of the object definition and its primitives be explicity defined. > Anyway, the *usual* practise is to have one type (or one "major" type) > per package, so "end Package_Name" serves the purpose well enough. Bummer when we have to rely on the compiler to catch simple errors that are eliminated by a change in syntax. But at least the compiler will catch the error (usually). SteveD > - Bob