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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,9983e856ed268154 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: RUSSIAN,UTF8 Received: by 10.180.88.195 with SMTP id bi3mr1184214wib.3.1344849727882; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 02:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Path: q11ni107118589wiw.1!nntp.google.com!feed-C.news.volia.net!volia.net!news2.volia.net!feed-A.news.volia.net!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!news-feed.eu.lambdanet.net!news.bcc.de!newsfeeder.ewetel.de!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!78.46.240.70.MISMATCH!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Vasiliy Molostov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Should Inline be private in the private part of a package spec? Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 18:06:22 +0400 Organization: None Message-ID: References: <501bd285$0$6564$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <502005b6$0$9510$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <50203ca2$0$9512$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <5020e0e1$0$6570$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <50211aed$0$6571$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: Xw13RWgh8yxgPSv0x3+H9w.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.01 (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: 2012-08-07T18:06:22+04:00 List-Id: Georg Bauhaus =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0= =BB(=D0=B0) =D0=B2 =D1=81=D0=B2=D0=BE=D1=91=D0=BC =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D1=8C= =D0=BC=D0=B5 Tue, = 07 Aug 2012 17:41:05 +0400: > On 07.08.12 15:09, Vasiliy Molostov wrote: >> Georg Bauhaus =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0= =D0=BB(=D0=B0) =D0=B2 =D1=81=D0=B2=D0=BE=D1=91=D0=BC =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D1= =8C=D0=BC=D0=B5 = >> Tue, 07 >> Aug 2012 13:33:21 +0400: > > Premise 1: The reader is the only important person in Ada programming.= > Premise 2: The reader wishes to learn from a package spec how to write= > a call statement (essential knowledge: profile, contract, exceptions).= > =3D=3D=3D=3D > Conclusion: Anything that does not answer the reader's questions as = > stated > in premise 2 is in excess of what is needed, in general, and not = > beneficial. I am the reader who wants to know from reading entity about all its = properties, *while reading entity* . Since properties and a common name = = for them define entity. pragmas placed along with such a entity gives me a way to obtain = properties in one reading pass, e.g. as a part of entity. pragmas being placed separately from entity breaks context and enforce = reading two times more. In this case a reader have to ensure that a = separated property is indeed the same one corresponding to what was = specified before (a public subprogram spec), to match it exactly as = possible, since additions in the public part with a new subprogram of th= e = same name cause rewrite of other parts not related to that is added = (should be concreted, since context in which first entity was defined = becomes broken with separation). > and it takes time to sort > out which aspects are essential (influence the program's > output) and which aspects aren't. You are right here, and potentially there should be a way to setup these= = things as mandatory for the design and as a caller's appliance = configuration. -- = =D0=9D=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BD=D0=BE =D0=B2 =D0=BF=D0=BE=D1=87= =D1=82=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=BE=D0=BC =D0=BA=D0=BB=D0=B8=D0=B5=D0=BD=D1=82=D0=B5= =D0=B1=D1=80=D0=B0=D1=83=D0=B7=D0=B5=D1=80=D0=B0 Opera: http://www.oper= a.com/mail/