Re: labeling (was: partitioning (was: Future))

[Christoph Grein <christoph.grein@eurocopter.com>]

This is getting more and more absurd. Why not stick to the current syntax:

[statement_identifier:] xxx
  ...
end xxx [identifier];

where xxx stands for:
  Ada95: loop_statement, block_statement
  Ada0Y: case_statement, if_statement, select_statement

Why on earth introduce new syntax? Please get the RM and see how it solves the 
present cases, and then try to take the syntax over to new cases. If you really 
want to have a chance of getting this thru, this is the way to go.

The ARG really has enough urgent problems to solve, and I bey they are reluctant 
to handle any such weird proposals.

> I would prefer
> 
>    case Animal label animal is
> 
> 
>    ......
> 
>     end animal;
> 
>     if Animal in Mammal label animal_if
>     then
> 
>     ...
>     end animal_if;
> 
> or possibly more readable:
> 
>     label animal_if
>     if Animal in Mammal
>     then
>     ...
>     end animal_if;
> 
> Prepending the statement which one want a named end for is perhaps easier to
> accomodate?
> 
> The label would not be available for anything else but end verification, so
> it would not be a problem that it has the same name as a variable or type.
> In other words; labels would have their own name space.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> comp.lang.ada mailing list
> comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
> http://ada.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada