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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,4200259190b16e16 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-03 00:33:16 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!tar-atanamir.cbb-automation.DE!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A. Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Visibility problems with package instantiations..... Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 09:37:10 +0100 Message-ID: References: <95234e08.0311270742.631b1228@posting.google.com> <349csv0udb5k0kuk0q99d7tm7fh5leuefu@4ax.com> <95234e08.0311280323.7a5bb870@posting.google.com> <95234e08.0311302345.4f9e235b@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: tar-atanamir.cbb-automation.de (212.79.194.116) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1070440395 70282452 212.79.194.116 ([77047]) X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3086 Date: 2003-12-03T09:37:10+01:00 List-Id: On 02 Dec 2003 11:20:08 -0500, Stephen Leake wrote: >Dmitry A. Kazakov writes: > >> On 01 Dec 2003 11:31:19 -0500, Stephen Leake >> wrote: >> >> >Dmitry A. Kazakov writes: >> > >> >> On 30 Nov 2003 23:45:51 -0800, petter.fryklund@atero.se (Petter >> >> Fryklund) wrote: >> > >> >> >Our CM policy >> >> >also dictates a directory structure with every unit in it's own branch >> >> >leading to a large tree. >> >> >> >> It is a reasonable policy. >> > >> >Maybe for Java, which requires that directory structure anyway. >> > >> >But for Ada, which has a good way to name files that indicates the >> >package heirarchy, directories should be used for even higher level >> >organization, like projects. >> >> For a small or medium sized project one can indeed pack everything in >> one directory. With hundreds of files it becomes rather difficult. > >Why? I don't have a problem with 280 files on Windows 2000. What sorts >of problems do you run into? To find a file in that huge directory. Note also that a nested package of level 5 could have name like: fuzzy.graph.handle.learning.implementation.ads It becomes a pain to navigate across this directory. It is difficult for human eye to recognize a postfix of a long name. So one have to separate files in some way. One possible way is to mimic the package tree. It is a reasonable way, but not the only one. >> So if there is no good code management system or IDE, it becomes >> reasonable to have separate directories for project branches [mapped >> to packages]. > >You are using the term "branches" in a way that is different than I'm >used to; I use it in the context of configuration management, to mean >a different development path of the same set of code; for a release, >or for an experimental new feature. The difference is not that great. For example, in one of my projects, there were many different layers of interfaces. Private, half-public, public + their implementations in different environments. It was reasonable to put the corresponding packages into different directories. Then not surprisingly, the resulting directory tree closely resembled one of the packages. >> BTW, maybe a stupid idea, but what if we change file naming policy >> allowing: >> >> package A.B is ... >> >> to be named "b.ads" IFF that is placed in a subdirectory named "a" of >> the directory containing "a.ads"? > >You can try that, but you have to get the compiler to support it. Surely >That's unlikely; most require a unique file name, _independent_ of the >directory. -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de