Re: Crosspost: Help wanted from comp.compilers

["Chad R. Meiners" <crmeiners@hotmail.com>]

"Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1058801854.533242@master.nyc.kbcfp.com...
> Chad R. Meiners wrote:
> > red herring
>
> I pointed out that sections which are claimed to provide
> a reason for certain recompilations in fact do not. I don't
> know why you consider that to be a red herring. The section
> which talks about recompiling dependents when a unit is
> compiled is 10.1.4(7), and that is an implementation
> permission, not a requirement.

Well the first red herring didn't apply seem to apply to the argument at
hand.   In retrospect, the second herring doesn't seem to be one.  I
misunderstood its intended meaning since it was not obvious that the
statement was intended to accomplish what you wanted it to.

> > When I read the Ada 95 Rationale's requirements section recompilation
issues
> > were not on the list of four major design requirements.
>
> Section I.3, listing the four main user needs, includes
> the cost of recompilation as a factor in two of them,
> programming by extension and program libraries.
>
> > Anyway a "significant problem" is in the eye of the beholder;
>  > therefore you implication holds no meaning. It is, however,
>  > emotionally charged.
>
> I have posted this before -
> <http://archive.adaic.com/docs/flyers/95fast.html>
>      "Say good-bye to the days of multiple-day
>       recompilation of Ada 83 software."
> This is from a page extolling the virtues of Ada.

When I examine these documents, I find that they support the view that long
recompilations issues result from high coupling.  The solution that Ada 95
provided was to add more features that allowed you to reduce coupling.  So
the impression I get is that the new features provide you with more methods
to modularize your code, and a direct benefit of this improvement is a
possible reduction of recompilation time if you design your programs
properly.  I think this is similar to what some others were trying to say,
but I would have to go back a reread this thread.

> I don't know why I should be accused of trolling when it
> seems to me that the Ada community was well aware of the
> issues surrounding lengthy recompilations and proclaimed
> Ada 95 as a soultion.

Miscommunication coupled with the occasional poorly formed arguments.  If it
is any consolation, I don't think you are troll; I just think that sometimes
you miscommunicate your position.  ;-)