Re: Don't use the "use" clause

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message
news:kzwbjdb0auzq.1kah1latt0mb1.dlg@40tude.net...
...
> Secondly, prefix notation as introduced in Ada 2005 is an equivalent of
use
> clause!

More of a replacement for the use clause. It has some use-like properties
for the subprogram name, but the object name is handled by normal visibility
rules. It would of course have fully qualified names.

But fully qualified names don't work for OOP in Ada, because it is extremely
difficult to tell where a particular operation is declared. Most of the
operations are inherited, after all, so the place where it is declared (and
thus the place that you use a fully qualified name to) is not the place
where the operation actually exists in the source code. That means that the
fully qualified name suggests that you look in the *wrong* place, and that
isn't helping anything.

OTOH, throwing in a pile of use clauses makes all kinds of unrelated stuff
visible. Prefixed notation only makes particular subprograms visible. In
that sense, it is like use type.

                            Randy.