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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e3f2eac5c026e3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-19 16:43:36 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: 18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Other Ada Standards (was Re: SIGada Conference)
Date: 19 Dec 2003 16:43:36 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <bebbba07.0312191643.179c5e14@posting.google.com>
References: <bebbba07.0312190051.5335ad9a@posting.google.com>
 <ibGEb.603870$Fm2.547664@attbi_s04>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.194.87.148
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1071881016 2627 127.0.0.1 (20 Dec 2003 00:43:36
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 00:43:36 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3596
Date: 2003-12-19T16:43:36-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

tmoran@acm.org wrote in message news:<ibGEb.603870$Fm2.547664@attbi_s04>...
> > ... and if it doesn't compile, so what? The programmer
> > simply goes back and put in ...
>    A fundamentally un-Ada way of approaching programming.  The Ada
> programmer is supposed to *design*, based on *understanding*, not
> just make tweaks to get around error messages.

And my suggested third alternative would not stop any programmer from
*designing* based on *understanding*. If he sees that the implied
"with" will not work, he simply puts in his own "with" that *will*
work. But if he forgets, the compiler will remind him, just as it will
remind him if he leaves out a semicolon. If he leaves out a semicolon,
does that mean that he is not *designing* based on *understanding*?