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: 2002-09-20 03:24:25 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!news-feed1.de1.concert.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!b88f5.pppool.DE!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A.Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: The Dreaded "Missing Subunits" Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 00:31:48 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1b585154.0209121449.ef12609@posting.google.com> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: b88f5.pppool.de (213.7.136.245) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032517463 5554588 213.7.136.245 (16 [77047]) User-Agent: KNode/0.4 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29209 Date: 2002-09-21T00:31:48+02:00 List-Id: Preben Randhol wrote: > Anyway I still think it is clearer to have the .ads files for looking at > what a package provides. Besides you should also put your documentation > here that has to do with the usage of the procedures/functions. As to > big systems, do the packages become huge too or is it only that there a > lot of them? There are many packages. Then if the software has to be portable, some of them have many platform-dependent bodies ("second axis"). Then there are packages providing abstract base types user-derived ones. The packages implementing that user-derived types ("third axis") multiply like flies (:-)). It is simply impossible to keep all that exploding stuff in one folder. But when you start to use subfolders then it is usually better to have one folder tree for specifications and another for implementations. So the file names never clash. For beginners and in classes it is easier to have an ability to put several compilation units in one file. Later on one can explain students that it is a bad praxis. (:-)) Maybe .ads, .adb are not so bad, I just suspect that they can much help in solving code management problems. -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de