Re: confusion with string initialization

["John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid>]

In article <hqhod3$tit$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
 "J-P. Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr> wrote:

> Colin Paul Gloster a écrit :
> 
> > Why did you consider a book which makes which packages things are 
> > in unclear by mutiliating programs by means of the USE keyword to 
> > be excellent?
> 
> Because it makes lisibility a lot better by drawing attention of the 
> reader on what actually the thing does, and getting rid of useless 
> information that you can find easily by clicking on the identifier 
> and selecting "go to declaration".
> 
> (Ok, Ok, I'm a bit provocative here, but I'm tired of seeing people 
> jumping on beginners and insisting on a notation that can drive them 
> away of the language screaming).

Preferring not to overuse "use", I recall becoming an instant fan of 
"use type" when it was introduced in Ada '95. Is there a way to make 
Ada.Strings.Fixed."*" visible without the use clause?

with Ada.Strings.Fixed; use Ada.Strings.Fixed;
with Ada.Strings.Bounded;
with Ada.Strings.Unbounded;
with Ada.Text_IO;

procedure UseType is
   package String20 is new
      Ada.Strings.Bounded.Generic_Bounded_Length(20);
   use type String20.Bounded_String;

   package StringN renames Ada.Strings.Unbounded;
   use type StringN.Unbounded_String;

   SB : constant String20.Bounded_String := 20 * '*';
   SN : constant StringN.Unbounded_String := 20 * '*';
   S1 : constant String := Ada.Strings.Fixed."*"(20, '*');
   S2 : constant String := 20 * '*';
begin
   Ada.Text_IO.Put_Line(String20.To_String(SB));
   Ada.Text_IO.Put_Line(StringN.To_String(SN));
   Ada.Text_IO.Put_Line(S1);
   Ada.Text_IO.Put_Line(S2);
end UseType;

-- 
John B. Matthews
trashgod at gmail dot com
<http://sites.google.com/site/drjohnbmatthews>