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,bd40601768eaf8fd X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: Array of Variant Records Question... Date: 1999/09/13 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 524768276 References: <7r5vh3$imu1@svlss.lmms.lmco.com> <37d6a45c@news1.prserv.net> <37d6ccb6@news1.prserv.net> <7r77i8$i08$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <37d7c116@news1.prserv.net> <7r8t21$ov5$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <37dcf193@news1.prserv.net> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: nntp1.ba.best.com 937285446 211 bpr@206.184.139.136 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-09-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Matthew Heaney wrote: > In article , > Brian Rogoff wrote: > > > Matt, can you give examples where you find that explicit conversions are > > painful, or damage readability? ... examples snipped ... > It's not a show-stopper though... I agree that the conversions are annoying, and since the implementation impact of fixing this appears negligible, we could do without them, but I don't find this any worse than the other cases in Ada where you have to say more than you really want. In fact, I find it considerably less annoying than those cases where I have to explicitly instantiate a generic subprogram when it is fairly obvious what I want. I'd really like to reconsider this entire idea of what is better for the reader and maintainer of code, since it is by no means clear that there is widespread consensus on what is more readable. Here is another example where being explicit is considered by some to be an impediment to readability. -- Brian