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: 103376,988f2c34ce3e6595
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Modest proposal, 2 of 3
Date: 1996/11/23
Message-ID: <dewar.848786910@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 198340151
references: <575ag6$rt6@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-11-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Van Snyder says

"Thus, a variable that a package publishes with "out" mode has the same
properties as a private variable with a public parameterless function to
access it, and no procedure to update it directly.  But it's more
efficient, and there's less code to write initially, and therefore less
to read and understand when you're the poor schmo assigned to make the
next minor change."


The "more efficient" part of this is completely bogus, since inlining
of the relevant function will eliminate any efficiency overhead.

Personally I do not like the idea of adding out as a keyword to variables,
it would encourage the use of global variables, and global variables are
almost always a bad idea in a language with thread support! I find the
worry about saving a few lines of code here to be a very weak argument.