Re: Ada standard and maximum line lengths

[Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>]

On 13-01-29 08:15 , J-P. Rosen wrote:
> Le 28/01/2013 22:29, Niklas Holsti a �crit :
>> In the same post in which Jeffrey quoted ARM 2.2(14), it seemed he was
>> reading it to mean that there is a coupling. I was asking how he deduced
>> that coupling. I'm asking the same question as you (J-P.), but from the
>> other side of the burden of proof.
>>
>> So, can you show the ARM verse that says that a compiler is not allowed
>> to limit identifiers to 200 characters, if it supports lines of 10,000
>> characters?
> I don't have much to add to Randy's response. Yes, you can read the RM
> this way,

Good that we agree on that.

> and no it's not the way it has been interpreted either by the
> ACATS or implementers.

Seems to be legacy from Ada 83, which should have been changed (in my
reading of the ARM, which I still see as more correct) for Ada 95.

> Since I see no benefit in having them different, I think a fix in the RM
> is the best thing to do.

In many programming languages and implementations from the last century,
maximum identifier length was much less than maximum line length. BASIC
originally had 1-letter identifiers. IIRC Fortran had a 6-character limit.

I don't mind if the ARM is changed (or interpreted) to require th a
compiler to support identifiers as long as the longest possible source
line. I don't think it is important one way or the other, as long as my
compiler supports reasonable lengths. 200 characters is ok as a max line
length. 200 for an identifier is overkill, IMO.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
      .      @       .