Re: The Dreaded "Missing Subunits"

[Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org>]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 20:56:18 GMT, Robert A Duff wrote:
> Contrast with Ada, where GNAT wants .ads/.adb, Rational wants
> .1.ada/.2.ada, and AdaMagic wants .spc/.bdy.  I know GNAT and AdaMagic
> have ways of overriding the convention (not sure about Rational),
> but you have to go to extra trouble to use a convention different
> from what the compiler wants.  Wouldn't it be better if all Ada
> compilers supported the same file-naming conventions out of the box,
> without using nonstandard pragmas Source_File_Name and the like?
> 
> What file-naming convention should I use, if I want to be
> portable across all compilers?  For C, the answer is easy.
> For Ada, it's not.

Well first you have to ensure that your source code *IS* portable to any
compiler, second it is not rocket-science to make a simple script to
rename the files depending on which compiler one has. Of course with
nice user-friendly Windows this is less easy because it is so user
friendly.

But that people get so worked up of simple name conventions sure signals
that they need to fill their time with coding ;-) I could need a nice
project planner in Ada with GtkAda GUI under GMGPL/GPL/BSD license. Any
takers ;-)

Preben