no title

no title

[And838N]

Bobby Bryant wrote:
>Also, it's not uncommon to find someone who tries to do "cute" things to
>optimize some local operation for speed, but then embeds it in a horribly
>inefficient exponential-time algorithm.

yeah, like bubble sort in assembler.  I shouldn't laugh.  I'll probably make this mistake once, and hopefully ONLY once.

Thanks Robert for the information!  There is a lot there for me to investigate and learn!

In my "learning session" today I noticed that a lot of the current Ada procedures and functions (dare I call them methods?) have those pesky '_'s in them.  Any plans in Ada200x for case sensitivity?  Maybe a command line flag if you want to have case sensitivity.

The syntax could be less finger stretchy with all the '_'s and we could have toUnboundedString instead of to_unbounded_string.  You could have x: Integer; and X: Integer;!!  What a bonus right?!  Just a thought.

Thanks again for the help!

Andrew







__________________________________________________________________
McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge.  Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455

Re: no title

[Preben Randhol]

And838N@netscape.net wrote:

> In my "learning session" today I noticed that a lot of the current Ada
> procedures and functions (dare I call them methods?) have those pesky
> '_'s in them.  Any plans in Ada200x for case sensitivity?  Maybe a
> command line flag if you want to have case sensitivity.

Case SenSitIvitY is a bAD ThiNg IMHO. It reduces readability as you need
to be sure you spelt it correctly according to the definition. One could
in fact have a GetString and getstring and Getstring and
getString procedure.

What is the problem with _ ? Get_String is more reable to me as it
seperates Get and String.

> 
> The syntax could be less finger stretchy with all the '_'s and we
> could have toUnboundedString instead of to_unbounded_string.  You
> could have x: Integer; and X: Integer;!!  What a bonus right?!  Just a
> thought.

No bonus at all see above.

What do you find more easy to read: ConvertIntegertoUnboundedString or
Convert_Integer_To_Unbounded_String (just to give an extreme example)
-- 
Preben Randhol                    http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/

Re: no title

[David C. Hoos, Sr.]

----- Original Message -----
From: <And838N@netscape.net>
To: <comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Sent: June 02, 2003 2:55 AM
Subject: no title


> Bobby Bryant wrote:
> >Also, it's not uncommon to find someone who tries to do "cute" things to
> >optimize some local operation for speed, but then embeds it in a horribly
> >inefficient exponential-time algorithm.
>
> yeah, like bubble sort in assembler.  I shouldn't laugh.  I'll probably make this mistake once,
and hopefully ONLY once.
>
> Thanks Robert for the information!  There is a lot there for me to investigate and learn!
>
> In my "learning session" today I noticed that a lot of the current Ada procedures and functions
(dare I call them methods?) have those pesky '_'s in them.  Any plans in Ada200x for case
sensitivity?  Maybe a command line flag if you want to have case sensitivity.
No plans at all; it will NEVER happen!
>
> The syntax could be less finger stretchy with all the '_'s and we could have toUnboundedString
instead of to_unbounded_string.  You could have x: Integer; and X: Integer;!!  What a bonus right?!
Just a thought.

Ada was designed for ease of reading, rather than ease of
writing, since programs are read my humans many moir� times than
they're read.

Many factors make up what is good style, from both performance
and human-readability points of view.

The Software Productivity Consortium has written the
Ada 95 Quality and Style Guide to explain these issues; an HTML
version is freely available at:
http://www.adaic.com/docs/95style/html/cover.html

>
> Thanks again for the help!
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> McAfee Virus Online from the Netscape Network.
> Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
> http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397
>
> Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge.  Download Now!
> http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455
> _______________________________________________
> comp.lang.ado mailing list
> comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
> http://ada.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada
>
>

Re: no title

[Georg Bauhaus]

And838N@netscape.net wrote:
: 
: In my "learning session" today I noticed that a lot of the current Ada
procedures and functions (dare I call them methods?)

Subprograms. (What's your precise definition of metod, btw.?)

: The syntax could be less finger stretchy

Why not use a decent editor that does the repetitive work for you?
Ada is for readers, not typists, anaway.

Re: no title

[Bobby D. Bryant]

On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 03:55:21 -0400, And838 wrote:

> The syntax could be less finger stretchy with all the '_'s and we could
> have toUnboundedString instead of to_unbounded_string.

Ick.

-- 
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas

Re: no title

[Gautier Write-only]

# In my "learning session" today I noticed that a lot of the current
# Ada procedures and functions (dare I call them methods?) have those
# pesky '_'s in them.  Any plans in Ada200x for case sensitivity?
# Maybe a command line flag if you want to have case sensitivity.
# 
# The syntax could be less finger stretchy with all the '_'s and
# we could have toUnboundedString instead of to_unbounded_string.
# You could have x: Integer; and X: Integer;!!
# What a bonus right?!  Just a thought.

You can always define
   subtype UnboundedString is Unbounded_String;
   function ToUnboundedString (Source : in String) 
     return UnboundedString renames To_Unbounded_String;
NB: no need of case-sensitivity!
For adding case sensitivity see other proposals for comments
in this newsgroup.
Apparently there is some resistence to add all these "retro"
features into Ada.
I'm afraid you have to invent a new "Retro" language with /*...*/
comments, #define's, #include's, case-sensitivity, implicit
declarations, flat visibility, plus a punched-card reader.
________________________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://www.mysunrise.ch/users/gdm/gsoft.htm

NB: For a direct answer, e-mail address on the Web site!

Re: no title

[Luke A. Guest]

On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 03:55:21 -0400, And838 wrote:

> Bobby Bryant wrote:
>>Also, it's not uncommon to find someone who tries to do "cute" things to
>>optimize some local operation for speed, but then embeds it in a horribly
>>inefficient exponential-time algorithm.
> 
> yeah, like bubble sort in assembler.  I shouldn't laugh.  I'll probably make this mistake once, and hopefully ONLY once.
> 
> Thanks Robert for the information!  There is a lot there for me to investigate and learn!
> 
> In my "learning session" today I noticed that a lot of the current Ada procedures and functions (dare I call them methods?) have those pesky '_'s in them.  Any plans in Ada200x for case sensitivity?  Maybe a command line flag if you want to have case sensitivity.
> 
> The syntax could be less finger stretchy with all the '_'s and we could have toUnboundedString instead of to_unbounded_string.  You could have x: Integer; and X: Integer;!!  What a bonus right?!  Just a thought.
> 
> Thanks again for the help!
> 
> Andrew

PLEASE! Enable word wrapping in your news client!

Luke.