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 22:07:22 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!eusc.inter.net!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: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 06:07:19 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: GMUGHDU
Message-ID: <bsogan$lg8$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
References: <468D78E4EE5C6A4093A4C00F29DF513D04B82B08@VS2.hdi.tvcabo>
   <bebbba07.0312242235.33b86222@posting.google.com>
 <bselgl$k99$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <3FEB047A.1040100@noplace.com>
 <bebbba07.0312261209.412acff7@posting.google.com>
 <bsiutu$1nt$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <bsjpps$dab6p$1@ID-77047.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <bsjth6$dna$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <bsmfav$d8f2i$2@ID-77047.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <bsmnjc$eqf$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <bsnc0v$ek36c$1@ID-77047.news.uni-berlin.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de
X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1072678039 22024 134.91.1.34 (29 Dec 2003
 06:07:19 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 06:07:19 +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:3915
Date: 2003-12-29T06:07:19+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
: I find "with"-ing boring. I cannot remember any case they helped me to solve
: any problem.

They might help others solving a problem :-)
with clauses might mark stars, followers, and independents in a network of
dependent units. Many with clauses -> unit is very likely a star.
If there are many stars, and no clique, something could be
wrong. In this sense with clauses document design and might indicate
problems. 

As an example, think of a class that takes on several roles but does
so only by way of a single huge collection of state variables cobbled
together.  (The (Java) class I am thinking of still exist; there is
some hope that it will be replaced .-)
That is, the states could have been grouped semantically
but have not been grouped using language means for grouping. Can
one build this class without a long list of with clauses somewhere
(or by writing a larger number of "provider" packages nested in the
same block so they can be seen where the type is declared,
or worse, a large package providing everything)?

Maybe it is easier to think about the correctness of what is happening
inside a package if the number of with clauses is low?

: Moreover careless designers tend to "with" everything
: they can.

So "with" is a useful indicator to maintainers?
 

-- Georg