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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!loke.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is there a way to do large block of source code comments Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 18:36:28 -0500 Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation Message-ID: References: <7376f57a-aa89-4ca4-8b44-568dee994707@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net X-Trace: loke.gir.dk 1409700988 12367 69.95.181.76 (2 Sep 2014 23:36:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 23:36:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:188814 Date: 2014-09-02T18:36:28-05:00 List-Id: "Adam Beneschan" wrote in message news:7376f57a-aa89-4ca4-8b44-568dee994707@googlegroups.com... ... > We do need to remember that our terminology, like our programming language > syntax and > our technology, did not spring forth fully formed from somebody's head. Unless it's Ada standard terms, like "progenitor" or "statically unevaluated" (and probably "elaboration" and "instantiation", although I wasn't around for those). Those literally appeared in someone's head when creating the associated wording. (Although there were other false starts.) Probably the exception that proves the rule. Randy.