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: 103376,52fd60a337c05842
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-18 06:53:38 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!uunet!sea.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!news
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: ada paper critic
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Message-ID: <wccvg8gzoaz.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 13:52:52 GMT
References: <mailman.1024083782.13211.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <wccadpwb1dw.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <M4RO8.4709$iR2.423709@news.xtra.co.nz> <aekqti$su8$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26236
Date: 2002-06-18T13:52:52+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:

> The Ada83 reference manual tended to use all caps for identifiers - not
> exactly a "recommendation"

Hey, you're right.  I must have been thinking of RM83-1.5(13), which
makes a specific recommendation about indentation style.  But I don't
see any recommended casing style (other than the fact that they use a
certain style).

>... but it was the fashionable thing to do (mimmic
> the LRM). And its really important to remember that as Ada was emerging into
> the light of day, there was still a lot of equipment out in the world that
> didn't support lower case. (Line printers being a common example.)

But that can't explain it, because they used lower-case boldface for
reserved words.

Some of those printers *could* support boldface, by backspacing and
overprinting. ;-)

By the way, is it true that Algol 60 and/or Algol 68 was font-sensitive
(i.e. "reserved words" are distinguished by being in boldface)?

- Bob