Re: N best things about Ada?

[Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>]

Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com> writes:

> People have mentioned packages, non-textual-substitution generics, and
> such.
> But one thing that could come in handy is the named parameters, and it
> is something I like; one of those "little things."

Yes.  It's such a small feature, yet has a huge benefit.
People should use it more often.

Another small feature: underscores in numeric literals.
One of my pet peeves is when I have to carefully
count the zeroes in 10000000, when it's so easy
to write 10_000_000.

> "Circle( Radius => 23, X => 28, Y => 14 );" will always be more
> readable than "Circle( 23, 28, 14 );" plus, there's the added benefit
> that 1) changes in parameter-ordering will not impact calls of this
> sort, & 2) the users of the functions/procedures can place the more
> pertinent parameters [to their task] more prominently [e.g. first].

Do you have any examples of that last part?  That is, examples
where using different parameter orders in different calls
makes the code more readable?

I think that sort of inconsistency usually makes the code less readable.
I wouldn't mind a rule that says the parameter order has to match
the declaration.  (A Legality Rule, not a Name Resolution Rule!)

- Bob