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,fce663eaf40b52f6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public Path: controlnews3.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A. Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: with and use again (was: Manifesto against Vector) Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 14:04:57 +0200 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: http://news.individual.net/abuse.html X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de tu2dfPtNEVflZgPF4FNYbgeWP6PG0fuNmt9xVArid1P255+y0= X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 Xref: controlnews3.google.com comp.lang.ada:313 Date: 2004-05-06T14:04:57+02:00 List-Id: On Thu, 6 May 2004 10:55:01 +0100, Marius Amado Alves wrote: >On Thursday 06 May 2004 10:29, Dmitry A.Kazakov wrote: >> On Thu, 6 May 2004 09:03:54 +0200, "Jean-Pierre Rosen" >> > ... With is a library level >> > clause; it tells: "this unit, somewhere needs that unit". >> Why that should be told? I'd say that "with" is superfluous. > >I think it's to make it easier for the compiler. Without the with a lot more >semantic processing would be required, and probably an additional pass. Huh, you will never extort that from a with-lover. (:-)) Guess why? Because if that were the only reason, then there would be no more arguments against use-ing without with-ing! -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de