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: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: jsa@alexandria.organon.com (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Interface/Implementation (was Re: Design by Contract) Date: 1997/09/06 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 270315643 Distribution: world References: <340C85CE.6F42@link.com> Organization: PSINet Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-09-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article kennel@nospam.lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)) writes: > :should only depend on what has come before. So yes, if there is a > :dependency ordering between two subprogram bodies, then either the > :dependent body must follow the other, or a specification for the body must > :preceed the dependent body (subprogram specs can appear in the package > :body). > > Wow. That is a really antideluvian mode of thought. Actually it is merely one way of getting at "consistent" elaboration for consistent execution results. It really has nothing to do with compiling technology. > :That there is a dependency-related ordering in Ada (both 83 and 95) is by > :design; that was the precise intent of Ada's designers. This should be > :regarded as a Good Thing, because it makes it easier for the human reader > :to apprehend program text. > > Does it, really? Who knows? In some cases, yes, in others no. More to the point, who cares? That's not what it's about anyway. > In real life could I even REMEMBER which identifiers were identified > when? Or is this something that a computer can only remember > perfectly? Obviously if you trip, it's the job of the compiler to tell you. > In real life, while I'm programming, why am I supposed to have to > remember which things are "before" and "after", in some silly > conflation of location in a text document with 'time'? Assuming I > don't have a single source file, is this at all justifiable? Well, this is (as I'm sure you realize) a strawman. I mean you don't have to remember anything as the compiler will tell you if you got it wrong. Is this "justifiable"? Well, it is one way to resolve elaboration problems. If you think that's rubbish, well, then I guess you don't think it's justifiable. Shrug. /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