Re: overriding in private part

[stefan-lucks@see-the.signature]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, Robert A Duff wrote:

> If you use a compiler that warns on missing "overriding", then you don't
> need to say "not overriding", because that's the default -- any
> subprogram that doesn't say "overriding" is not overriding.
> Saying "not overriding" is just noise.

"If you use a compiler that [does the right thing]" (or rather, if you use 
that compiler and the right set compiler switches) that works more or less 
fine. Except that you get only a warning on something that ought to be 
treated as an error. (Yes, I know that gnat has a switch to treat warnings 
as errors.)

But a compiler-agnostic way to enforce the proper behaviour (overriding 
indicators for all the subprograms which actually override another 
subprogram) would be preferable, IMHO. I wish there was an Ada 05
  "pragma Overriding_Indicators_For_All_Oriding_Subprograms"
or the like. Or did I overlook something like that in the standard?

So long

Stefan



-- 
------ Stefan Lucks   --  Bauhaus-University Weimar  --   Germany  ------
               Stefan dot Lucks at uni minus weimar dot de
------  I  love  the  taste  of  Cryptanalysis  in  the  morning!  ------