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: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Interface/Implementation (was Re: Design by Contract)
Date: 1997/09/12
Message-ID: <dewar.874116292@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 272052257
References: <dewar.873938821@merv> <EGByD3.MGw@syd.csa.com.au>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 1997-09-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Don said

<<I think you're getting your contexts confused here. My comment was made in
the specific context of *no* prior declarations.>>

Yes, but no one writes Ada programs of any significant complexity with
no prior declarations, so your observation is about as useful as one which
notes that conditionals in Ada are awkward in the context of avoiding
the use of if statements.