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: 103376,4200259190b16e16 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-04 05:59:12 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!tar-atanamir.cbb-automation.DE!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A. Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Visibility problems with package instantiations..... Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:03:11 +0100 Message-ID: References: <95234e08.0311280323.7a5bb870@posting.google.com> <95234e08.0311302345.4f9e235b@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: tar-atanamir.cbb-automation.de (212.79.194.116) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1070546351 71941783 212.79.194.116 ([77047]) X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3128 Date: 2003-12-04T15:03:11+01:00 List-Id: On 04 Dec 2003 08:09:22 -0500, Stephen Leake wrote: >Dmitry A.Kazakov writes: > >> On 03 Dec 2003 13:09:25 -0500, Stephen Leake >> wrote: >> >> >Hmm. In emacs, I pull up the whole directory, then search in the >> >buffer. >> > >> >But actually, to navigate Ada source, I don't tend to use file names; >> >I use Ada names, and let Emacs figure out where the files are. >> >> I see. You know, an ability to accept emacs is IMO sort of genetically >> preprogrammed. (:-)) > >Well, there do seem to be Emacs people and non-Emacs people. > >> >File names that mimic the package tree are better than directories >> >that mimic the package tree, in my opinion. I haven't heard any solid >> >evidence here to contradict that. >> >> As a emacs user you should see little difference between: >> >> fuzzy-graph-handle-learning-implementation.ads >> >> and >> >> fuzzy/graph/handle/learning/implementation.ads >> >> after all one can substitute '/' for '-' in emacs. > >Exactly; they are very much the same in readability. But, I have to >add all directories to various search lists, so it is much easier to >have only a few directories. Thus I prefer long file names over long >directory paths. It depends on the compiler and IDE. AdaGide does it very good for GNAT. I found it easier to use than GPS (except for debugging of course). >> Then, do not you feel that packing everything in one directory is >> similar to packing all packages in one huge all_stuff.ada file? > >Since the Ada compiler treats compilation units in one file much >differently than compilation units in separate files, but cares not at >all about what directories things are in, these are very different issues. > >> I mean that if we accept the idea of mapping compilation units to >> files, we should also, consequently, accept mapping of their >> parent-child relations to the directory-file ones. > >I accept it as a possibility, but it is simply not as nice in practice. > >Java is the only language I have used that cares about directories; I >found it annoying. But if I had to use it much, I'd teach Emacs how to >deal with it efficiently (or, more likely, find an Emacs package that >someone else has written that does that). Then I wouldn't notice >anymore. The same could be done for Ada, of course, if we had a >compiler that supported it. But I see no compelling reason to bother. > >If the tools you are using get in your way (don't allow an efficient, >convenient way to find files), then get (or build) better tools. The >compiler is not at fault; your IDE is. Right. With a good IDE there should be no reason to care about files. But the issue will arise in another form, as you write below. >I find GPS annoying with long file names, because it does not allow >searching on anything other than the first letter of the file name (as >do most GUI IDEs). Emacs allows searching on any portion of the file >name. Yes GPS has a long way to go. One problem is that the project view shows files (and their directories) instead of compilation units. I.e. it should be sort of: + specifications + window + pop_up - dialog instead of: + some-irrelevant-directory-path - window-pop_up-dialog.ads with a negative effect of consuming too much of screen space. One can organize project view in a directory-tree-like way under MSVC++. In C++ there is no parent/child relation, so one should create project "directories" manually. ObjectAda at least supports separation of specifications and bodies. But in Ada there is a natural "partitioning" base on parent-child/separate body relation. Should IDE support it, then, yes, one could forget about all file names. >Give Emacs another try; it will be good for you :). Maybe, when EU will allow experiments on stem cells, then a small injection of emacs-cells and ... (:-)) -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de