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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,38159b1b5557a2e7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-27 14:03:32 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!216.196.98.140.MISMATCH!border1.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border2.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:03:20 -0600 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:03:19 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Standard Ada Preprocessor References: <400BDB7C.40100@noplace.com> <400D2150.6000705@noplace.com> <400E72F9.8060501@noplace.com> <100upo7ln5e3k59@corp.supernews.com> <400FC8E8.2040100@noplace.com> <4011127C.4030801@noplace.com> <101377e54car5cc@corp.supernews.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.147.77.160 X-Trace: sv3-Qfa4wxpXEKJC7ULKF1wjHiqFuaLrNkGGYevFk1itbE5bYo1eAWiRtjW4JVnWyivIRumB6grqMCDL9aL!th1qZonyJS8+GktlzBzB4MEU+ksa/qfRX9uxcAzJjTNHR6Ew/qD16YdWZizDFA== X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4943 Date: 2004-01-27T17:03:19-05:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > I'm rather skeptical of talk about "Ada philosophy". I agree with you > and MDC that the issue is a very practical one. It's all well and good > to recommend encapsulating system dependencies in package bodies and so > forth. But you still need some mechanism to select which body to use in > each case. I don't see any advantage to using make-file hackery for > that, over using #ifdef's. I completely and totally agree. One of the things I love about Ada is the ability to avoid messing around with makefiles. But this again totally misses what I keep saying about Ada pre-processors. I don't avoid them intentionally. It is just that if I get to the body of one of these implementation dependent packages, I usually write it using ifs and case statements planning to convert to #ifdefs later if needed. This allows me to use one Ada compiler to (compile-time) debug the Ada code completely. But once it compiles cleanly I don't switch to pre-processor directives for the fun of it. I wait until I need it. I'm still waiting... If your experience is different, fine. But why are we arguing? I never said that Ada compilers shouldn't support pre-processors, or that they shouldn't be used. I just suggested waiting until it is needed. I'm going to get back to work on some Ada code I hope to post soon. Again, if it needs a pre-processor to make it portable, I'll use one. But I don't expect it to happen. Now if you think there should be a STANDARD Ada pre-processor, that is fine with me as well. Just don't expect the ARG to develop the standard, form a PRG or whatever instead. The ARG already has enough to do. >>I am not against any of these techniques. What I am against >>is the notion that "no, we don't do it that way because it >>might get abused". Definitely not my position. I am the typical engineer. I work very hard at being lazy. So I will use whatever tools make my life easier. In this case, my "ivory tower notion" is that if I can do it in Ada, or with a pre-processor, I'll do it in Ada, even if it takes a little more design effort up front. I know that when I am deep into schedule pressure and design changes I will thank myself. -- Robert I. Eachus "The war on terror is a different kind of war, waged capture by capture, cell by cell, and victory by victory. Our security is assured by our perseverance and by our sure belief in the success of liberty." -- George W. Bush