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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,577df5d4a0e88785
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-12-14 17:40:08 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.mesh.ad.jp!cyclone.bc.net!cyclone-sjo1.usenetserver.com!news-out.usenetserver.com!nntp.flash.net!news.flash.net!not-for-mail
From: "Ken Garlington" <Ken.Garlington@computer.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: 
 <B6A1A9B09E52D31183ED00A0C9E0888C469941@nctswashxchg.nctswash.navy.mil>
 <FvCZ5.7008$bw.625530@news.flash.net> <3A376D69.A420D711@earthlink.net>
 <131220001555268634%emery@mitre.org> <91agll$kup$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <iH4_5.7971$bw.730063@news.flash.net> <3A39610A.890470BF@nowhere.com>
Subject: Re: Bad coding standards
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <XDe_5.8295$bw.775656@news.flash.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 01:40:07 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.215.83.115
X-Complaints-To: abuse@flash.net
X-Trace: news.flash.net 976844407 216.215.83.115 (Thu,
 14 Dec 2000 19:40:07 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:40:07 CST
Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3153
Date: 2000-12-15T01:40:07+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Wayne Magor" <none@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:3A39610A.890470BF@nowhere.com...
:
:
: Ken Garlington wrote:
:
: >
: >   function "+" (Left, Right: Some_Type) return Some_Type renames
: > Some_Package."+";
: >
: >   function "-" (Left, Right: Some_Type) return Some_Type renames
: > Some_Package."+";
: >
:
: This example illustrates why I consider the absolute worst coding standard
ever
: to have been the common Ada83 standard of "the use of the USE clause is
: prohibited".  When you have this ridiculous coding standard, you are
almost
: forced into doing operator renaming, however, this is very dangerous in
Ada.
:
: Do you see the bug in the above code?

Not only did I see it - I referred to it in the same post!

Of course, the particular style I described is much worse than the "never
use USE" convention, because it propagates the problem well beyond
operators.