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: 103376,9e2776c05028676e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,80e076d5ce42fefa X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Why Ada is not the Commercial Lang of Choice Date: 1997/06/24 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 252194408 References: Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-06-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Don Harrison says, rather irrelevantly: <<:Don said : :<> : :I strongly disagree, it is none of the language's business how I want to :group things, since it depends on the abstract semantics of the item :involved: : : Last_OK_Date : constant := 99_12_31; : :is perfectly reasonable. Really? I would have thought such use of integers created a huge potential for abuse. For example, >> Why irrelevant? Because this post is not about whether or not it is a good idea to use integers as dates, it is about the use of underlines if you *do* use integers as dates. For example, if you are using a library routine that expects an integer for the date, then it is nice to be able to spell the constants that way. (when using canned library routines, one does not generally have the luxury of refusing to use the interface on the grounds that you don't like the design! So when I say this is reasonable, (I thought it was obvious from context), I mean it is reasonable to use underscores as written, rather than be forced, as in Eiffel, to use 991_231!