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: 103376,1e3f2eac5c026e3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-27 03:18:22 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!washdc3-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!ngpeer.news.aol.com!feed2.newsreader.com!newsreader.com!newshosting.com!news-xfer2.atl.newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!peernews3.colt.net!news0.de.colt.net!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-ham1.dfn.de!news.uni-hamburg.de!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail
From: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Other Ada Standards (was Re: SIGada Conference)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 11:18:21 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: GMUGHDU
Message-ID: <bsjppt$9o7$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
References: <468D78E4EE5C6A4093A4C00F29DF513D04B82B08@VS2.hdi.tvcabo>
   <3FE991DD.5060301@noplace.com>
 <bebbba07.0312241216.161fb3f5@posting.google.com>
 <wccekutx599.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <3FEA5C82.8050309@noplace.com>
 <bebbba07.0312242235.33b86222@posting.google.com>
 <bselgl$k99$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <3FEB047A.1040100@noplace.com>
 <bebbba07.0312261209.412acff7@posting.google.com>
 <bsiutu$1nt$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <bebbba07.0312262340.105fb8bb@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de
X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1072523901 9991 134.91.1.34 (27 Dec 2003
 11:18:21 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 11:18:21 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00
 (9000/800))
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3842
Date: 2003-12-27T11:18:21+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Russ <18k11tm001@sneakemail.com> wrote:
 
: As I wrote in my original post, "with/use A.B;" would be exactly
: equivalent to "with A.B; use A.B;" It's simple text substitution.

Ah O.K., yes, preprocessing, not Ada.
Coming back to one of your analogies, "use hammer", let me replace
"hammer" with "potatoes". If you think of the way recipes are
written, "with potatoes;" and then "use potatoes"; seems like the
proper way to state things, namely in the "you need..." sections
and the "you do..." sections respectively? :-)

Using another analogy, a building site, you
"bring Tools;" from the shop and then "apply Tools;" at the site.
This looks like "with Tools; use Tools;" to me, to be understood
in contexts that do require separate instructions (shop: with,
site: use). But I still think analogies won't help.

And can a programming language be but grammatically awkward
if you measure its expressiveness by some (delibarately?) chosen
subset of natural language?


-- Georg