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: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public From: jsa@alexandria.organon.com (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Safety-critical development in Ada and Eiffel Date: 1997/07/18 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 257635541 Distribution: world References: Organization: PSINet Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-07-18T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > As for the "infuriating" Ada 83 visibility "problem". I always found this > odd. I understand that people do not like to use "use" because, especially > with poor tools, they want to be easily able to tell where somethintg > comes from, but I never understood why this perfectly understandable > reasoning does not apply to operators (personally I prefer to use "use" > most of the time anyway). I quite agree. What I found odd (at best) about the "use type" thing in Ada95 was that it doesn't really "use type" - you only get the operators - a kind of "half-use type". IMO, this gives you the worst of both worlds. If it had really given you all the operations on a type (not just those using operator syntax) it would have been a pretty nice idea for those cases where you have more than one such type in a package. As it is, I find that "use" is still the clearest thing to do... /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari