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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,c39ad3e35a7690a9 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8 Received: by 10.68.241.37 with SMTP id wf5mr7191373pbc.4.1329038328551; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:18:48 -0800 (PST) Path: wr5ni15540pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin3!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?= =?utf-8?Q?=29?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Convention for naming of packages Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:18:46 +0100 Organization: Ada @ Home Message-ID: References: <4f355230$0$21451$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: ZPUexcoGKiaqwbGcRIg6eA.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.61 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Date: 2012-02-12T10:18:46+01:00 List-Id: Le Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:06:36 +0100, Simon Wright a = = =C3=A9crit: >> Fine with that: >> >> Print (This =3D> =E2=80=A6); -- Operation >> Update (This =3D> =E2=80=A6); -- Operation >> >> But not with that: >> >> Set_Weight (This =3D> =E2=80=A6, Value =3D> =E2=80=A6); -- Setter >> Weight (This =3D> =E2=80=A6); -- Getter >> Relation (This =3D> =E2=80=A6, Foo =3D> =E2=80=A6); -- Express= ion > > Personally I wouldn't use named association for the first > (dispatching/oblect) parameter. I saw Foo (This =3D> This, ...) too > often. And now you'd say > > Foo.Set_Weight (Value =3D> ...); or > Foo.Set_Weight (To =3D> ...); > Bar :=3D Foo.Weight; > Doted notation is excluded for me, as tagged types are not so common and= = don't want a distinction between static/dynamic linking (and dispatching= = may be hidden anyway). Still worth nothing for others who use doted notation. >> Ex. >> >> Me : constant Instance_Type renames This; >> Me : constant Instance_Type renames On; >> Me : constant Instance_Type renames Of; >> Me : constant Instance_Type renames From; >> >> Would be rather pleasant to read and unlikely to make people shout >> "Hey, that's too much wordy! That's just bloat!". >> >> What's your feeling? > > I think I would say it was bloat. One very quickly gets used to 'This'= > (especially when using a code generator which always uses 'This' for t= he > object parameter!). But for one of the longer 'functional' names I was= > mentioning earlier, it certainly could make sense. Excuse me, I'm not sure I understand the sentence =E2=80=9CBut for one o= f the = longer 'functional' names I was mentioning earlier=E2=80=9D, at least I = could not = track it back (that's why I feel I did not understand). -- = =E2=80=9CSyntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.=E2=80=9D [1] =E2=80=9CStructured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.= =E2=80=9D [1] [1]: Epigrams on Programming =E2=80=94 Alan J. =E2=80=94 P. Yale Univers= ity