Re: Question about base types

[mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney)]

In article <dewar.855492829@merv>, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote:

>Of course the best of both worlds would be to have the capability of
>further explaining messages in extended text, where it might in some
>cases be appropriate to explain the more precise terminology, and
>even give an RM reference. As I have mentioned previously, this is a
>tool that is on our list of useful things to do.

I was wondering about that. I've only been a GNAT user for a week, and I
was a little surprised that the error messages didn't include an RM
reference automatically.  I figured there was some switch I could turn on
to get the RM references, too.

Compiling a program tests one's knowledge of the language.  From
time-to-time I'll do something I'm not sure is legal (more true now with my
new compiler), to see if it compiles.  When I get an error message, I like
to haul out the RM and look it up, to see the rule actually written on the
page. 

Admittedly, reading the RM is at times a painful process, but to really
understand the language, you have know how to navigate the RM.

So yeah, I think that adding the switch

-gnatmatt

to display messages for "expert" users would be a swell idea. ;)

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Heaney
Software Development Consultant
<mailto:matthew_heaney@acm.org>
(818) 985-1271