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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f92fbb4a0420dd57
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: some questions re. Ada/GNAT from a C++/GCC user
Date: 1996/04/01
Message-ID: <dewar.828365023@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 145230669
references: <Dp1sMM.23q@world.std.com> <4jjul6$637@ra.nrl.navy.mil>
 <Dp3uBz.ALF@world.std.com>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-04-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Bob said:

"You miss the point.  C++ doesn't require "{" and "}" in this case -- the
case we're talking about is where no visual cues are necessary.  I can
understand that one might like "begin" better than "{", but this is a
case where C++ requires nothing at all, and Ada requires "declare",
"begin", and "end", for no good reason."

I strongly disagree. For VERY good reason! 

To me, considering declarations and statements to be the same sort of
thing is confusion, not unification :-)