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: 2003-12-28 05:59:09 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail From: Georg Bauhaus Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Other Ada Standards (was Re: SIGada Conference) Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 13:59:08 +0000 (UTC) Organization: GMUGHDU Message-ID: References: <468D78E4EE5C6A4093A4C00F29DF513D04B82B08@VS2.hdi.tvcabo> <3FEA5C82.8050309@noplace.com> <3FEB047A.1040100@noplace.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1072619948 15183 134.91.1.34 (28 Dec 2003 13:59:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 13:59:08 +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:3884 Date: 2003-12-28T13:59:08+00:00 List-Id: Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: : Or with getting rid of with clauses at all, as Robert Duff mentioned in : passing! I never liked them. How about that? That is what has been driving me up the wall when debugging Java classes. The author liked a particular feature of the IDE that popped up a menu of methods applicable to an object if either the import list names the package, or if the fully qualified named was there, (type top.mid.Something.>.) Result: occurences of top.mid.Somthing.meth(...) everywhere and _not_ top.mid.Something in the import list. So, by just looking at the import list, nothing was known about the dependences, because they were sprinkeled all over the sources, and therfore implicit. Can a good IDE help in this case? Not much I guess. To what extent can it help when the source code cannot be compiled? I imagine that an IDE might need error correction at an extreme AI guessing level so to speak, in order to be helpful. Should a programming language depend on an IDE? There have been some extensions to Oberon-2, one being related to concurrency, http://bluebottle.ethz.ch/languagereport/node3.html AFAICS, if a maintainer wants to find the "concurrency structure" of a an Active Oberon program, he/she will have to make a search for some keywords embedded in type definitions, and prodecure definitions. (That is, it looks more like type T is program text program text protected program text end T; rather than protected type T is program text program text program text end T; The first variant might look quite flexible as you only have to add some keyword like {ACTIVE} or {EXCLUSIVE} (for protected etc) after some BEGIN. To a reader this might look like you can add concurrency ad hoc. Or you might just switch some cuncurrency feature off for a procedure by removing a keyword. But then this is ad hoc design, not easy to spot, and somehow feels not well structured, as it buries the concurrency indicators in type definitions or procedure implementations. It might allow some clever tricks syntaxwise. But do you want this kind of cleverness attitude expressed in Ada programs? Omitting with clauses might to have similar effects on design, I think. -- Georg