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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,4c019ad9cc913bbe X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-09-19 02:41:44 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!130.133.1.3!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!b9dc2.pppool.DE!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A.Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: The Dreaded "Missing Subunits" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 23:49:06 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1b585154.0209121449.ef12609@posting.google.com> <4519e058.0209160548.461cef27@posting.google.com> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: b9dc2.pppool.de (213.7.157.194) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032428502 4802120 213.7.157.194 (16 [77047]) User-Agent: KNode/0.4 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29159 Date: 2002-09-19T23:49:06+02:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > Contrast with Ada, where GNAT wants .ads/.adb, Rational wants > .1.ada/.2.ada, and AdaMagic wants .spc/.bdy. I know GNAT and AdaMagic > have ways of overriding the convention (not sure about Rational), > but you have to go to extra trouble to use a convention different > from what the compiler wants. Wouldn't it be better if all Ada > compilers supported the same file-naming conventions out of the box, > without using nonstandard pragmas Source_File_Name and the like? Can somebody explain why those nasty .ads/.adb appeared? Is that a big deal to detect the word "body" in the source code? Why files cannot be just .ada? If I wish to separate specifications and bodies, well, since RSX-11M all operating systems have subfolders... -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de