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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7eaf9f2597de2259 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-10 06:45:57 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!213.56.195.71!fr.usenet-edu.net!usenet-edu.net!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: "M. A. Alves" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: on package naming, should the word "_pkg" be part of it? Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 15:53:58 +0000 (GMT) Organization: ENST, France Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1002721556 44641 137.194.161.2 (10 Oct 2001 13:45:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 13:45:56 +0000 (UTC) To: Return-Path: X-X-Sender: In-Reply-To: <3bc44449.9587095@news.demon.co.uk> Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.4 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14153 Date: 2001-10-10T15:53:58+00:00 On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, John McCabe wrote: > . . . > > why not have something like: > > class XXX is > procedure DoSomething; > procedure AClassOperation is classwide; > end XXX; > > . . . > > Also, having worked with a number of people on Ada projects who had > recently used Java, C++, Visual Basic etc, I think the lack of an > object.method syntax was a serious limitation to their acceptance of > Ada 95 as an OO language. Yes, Ada 95 class idiom is a bit hard, but it is ok: perhaps it is better to leave it as it is and use other software engineering items e.g. UML to do the OO modeling and generate Ada automatically from this. But I think the Object.Method syntax can be added with total compatibility with Ada 95. It really just "sugar". I think Tucker Taft showed this. Personally I prefer Method(Object). I just agree that both syntaxes should be there, if possible; and if not, stay with Method(Object) ;-) Cheers, -- , M A R I O data miner, LIACC, room 221 tel 351+226078830, ext 121 A M A D O Rua Campo Alegre, 823 fax 351+226003654 A L V E S P-4150 PORTO, Portugal mob 351+939354002