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: 103376,997e6472f58cc955 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-04 01:40:42 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.vmunix.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!213.200.246.247!not-for-mail From: Vinzent Hoefler Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Case dependence and coding standards Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 10:39:16 +0200 Organization: JeLlyFish software Message-ID: References: <035odv8mfiksmqo69q0250qp141oebtdro@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.200.246.247 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1054716035 10844103 213.200.246.247 (16 [175126]) X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38574 Date: 2003-06-04T10:39:16+02:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: >Vinzent Hoefler writes: > >> Robert A Duff wrote: >>=20 >> >It would be nicer to have a compiler that simply corrected such = errors >> >in the source file, instead of complaining about them. >>=20 >> Well, I expect a compiler to *read* the source, not actually *write* >> it. > >Sure, that's what we're all used to. But we expect our editors and >pretty-printers and CM systems and so forth to modify our source code. Well, let's say it so: I expect it changes the source in the way I intended to change the source by hacking on some keys, but never automatically. >I like to turn on the GNAT switch that complains when I say "Text_io" >instead of "Text_IO". Yes, me too. And then I fix such typos by hand. > The latter is more readable, because that's how >the package was declared. But I would like even better for it to fix >it, rather than complain about it. Well, I wouldn't like it. I would expect that a command like "pretty-print foobar.adb" to do, but not the compiler. Sometimes source files that I wish to be compiled aren't even writable. >> >not to punish programmers who are too >> >lazy to hit the shift key. >>=20 >> NAK. Lazyness has to be punished. Hard. ;-> > >On the contrary. Laziness should be encouraged, in the sense of >programmers avoiding useless work. Perhaps we are talking about different kinds of laziness here. :) > The only kind of laziness I want >to inhibit is the kind that causes extra work in the long run >(e.g. unreadable code). Yes, but I don't see, how not hitting the shift-key at the appropriate time to generate readable code isn't laziness. Yeah, I know typos are the usual suspects, but fixing them automatically would encourage the coder to never use the shift key, because "the compiler fixes it anyway". That's laziness and is contrary to my opinion that the code has to be readable from the very first start. Its kind of the same problem why quick fixes (aka. dirty hacks) become standard some months later... ;) Vinzent. --=20 Parents strongly cautioned -- this posting is intended for mature audiences over 18. It may contain some material that many parents would not find suitable for children and may include intense violence, sexual situations, coarse language and suggestive dialogue.