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,ea40456edaea3d23
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Pascal to Ada translator/ aflex,ayacc GNAT ports
Date: 1996/11/29
Message-ID: <dewar.849318953@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 201493901
references: <57htn2$jm8@cnn.Princeton.EDU> <57i8af$p8m@felix.seas.gwu.edu>
 <57j17b$6pt@news.pacifier.com> <dewar.849267826@merv>
 <01bbde30$7a63d4e0$11208b82@wd>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-11-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Wiljan says

"I do not agree that this is the obvious translation.
It depends on how the code is original written. In many cases you can
of cause give an abvious translation to Ada but it depends from case to
case."


I am confused, you seem to be talking in generalities (which are in fact
reasonable), but you don't seem to talk to this specific case. Can you
show an example where you think it is inappropriate to translate the
Pascal "with" into an Ada renaming?

Seems to me that the Pascal WITH is *exactly* analogous to the Ada renaming,
with a little less to write, but with less flexibility.