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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,967ae26df92535de
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-09-18 10:46:04 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.com!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail
From: Ingo Marks <nospam_adv@region-nord.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: New Software Forum
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 19:46:01 +0200
Organization: T-Online
Message-ID: <amae2n$q5m$05$1@news.t-online.com>
References: <3D8356A7.9010208@worldnet.att.net>
 <am7lu5$fk9$01$2@news.t-online.com>
 <slrnaoeprn.vb.randhol+news@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <ba162549.0209180607.1c79a6a5@posting.google.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1032371096 05 26806 LT3Kb2iGSzAEEd 020918 17:44:56
X-Complaints-To: abuse@t-online.com
X-Sender: 340020534592-0001@t-dialin.net
User-Agent: KNode/0.6.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29121
Date: 2002-09-18T19:46:01+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Kevin Cline wrote:

> Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> wrote in message
> news:<slrnaoeprn.vb.randhol+news@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>...
>> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:41:43 +0200, Ingo Marks wrote:
>> > Ingo Marks wrote:
>> > 
>> > or even this way :-)
>> >  
>> > Put_Line ("Iteration" & Num &
>> >           " Result:"  & Result &
>> >           " Time:"    & Elapsed_Time);
>> 
>> Well now we are borderlining the poor readability. In the previous
>> version I could at least know that Elapsed_Time was a Duration here it
>> can be anything. This is one of the great features of Ada that it is so
>> self-documenting.
> 
> This version is easier to read and easier to maintain.  I don't need to
> know the type of Elapsed_Time to understand this statement, and the
> compiler already knows the type and shouldn't need to be told again.
> Repeating the type here reduces readability and makes the code more
> sensitive to a change in the type of Elapsed_Time.

The compiler doesn't need extra specification but an unbiased reader of 
your source would appreciate it.

For myself I always use the short form for integer (or ranges of it) only. 
So I would prefer

Put_Line ("Iteration" & Num &
          " Result:"  & Result &
          " Time:"    & Duration'Image(Elapsed_Time));

If it is inevitable that the type of Elapsed_Time may change in future then 
it could be good idea to define a subtype:

subtype My_Duration is Duration;

Put_Line ("Iteration" & Num &
          " Result:"  & Result &
          " Time:"    & My_Duration'Image(Elapsed_Time));

If you have to change the type you just need to change one line (hopefully).

Regards,
Ingo