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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,89cb2d7ffc7421c9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!news4.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr27.news.prodigy.net.POSTED!4988f22a!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: Ripple effect X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.134.77.87 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr27.news.prodigy.net 1157813712 ST000 70.134.77.87 (Sat, 09 Sep 2006 10:55:12 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 10:55:12 EDT Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com X-UserInfo1: Q[R_PJSCTS@QBTLYYZH@^SXBUSXB@DTMNHWB_EYLJZ]BGIEL_NTKAH_[JTXDX_KI\VB]JBVMS^YT_G[CZVWAOS\DHFWEH]@KGXYHB\_CMDSFABP^J[AHHRKARLE_JDBLJ\XA[JRMEI]MGJSPB\Y]^KG\@S^@VQKI_Q[G@@_ACSARASDEFLBJ]S\GFNTUAVBL Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 14:55:12 GMT Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6536 Date: 2006-09-09T14:55:12+00:00 List-Id: "Randy Brukardt" wrote in message news:upmdnWsSlagGjGPZnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@megapath.net... > > Huh? I often check for unused with clauses in my programs - by hand, and > generally not because of compiler warnings (although we get those, too). I > often try to eliminate things that are used only once. I guess I'd agree > more if you said "rarely" as opposed to "ever". > I recall an early DoD system programmed in Ada where the dependency chart looked like a hairball. The reason was that all the with clauses were in the package specifications. Sad to say, the compiler did not alert anyone to the problem the way some compilers of today will. Everytime any unit had to be compiled, all the packages in the with clauses also had to be recompiled. OK. This was a silly design. But Ada was new and it took time to catch on the fact that with clauses, when pushed down to the package body would eliminate a lot of compilation time. Eventually, when somone figured out the usefulness of subunits, those dependencies were often pushed down to that level. Much of the grumbling about Ada, in those early days, was due to the ignorance about just how it worked. As people discovered how to use it correctly, the programs got better and better. However, a lot of programmer got discouraged because they never learned this lessons. And Ada got a lot of bad press, not because of its own faults, but because of the ignorance of the people trying to use it. Some of this ignorance persists even today. Richard Riehle