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-Thread: 103376,8143b93889fe9472
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.66.72.3 with SMTP id z3mr289225pau.40.1359493293506;
        Tue, 29 Jan 2013 13:01:33 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 6ni22799pbd.1!nntp.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.glorb.com!news-out.readnews.com!transit3.readnews.com!panix!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada standard and maximum line lengths
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:01:33 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wccy5fb7lg2.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <8dfcf819-e1d0-4578-a795-a4bf724b5014@googlegroups.com>
 <ke55qi$59m$1@dont-email.me> <ammppjF63goU1@mid.individual.net>
 <ke69q3$vou$1@dont-email.me> <amo50dFg605U1@mid.individual.net>
 <ke6o2n$jrj$1@dont-email.me> <amo8u2Fh3ngU1@mid.individual.net>
 <ke7peh$tof$1@dont-email.me> <ampmcqFqh9aU1@mid.individual.net>
 <amqq76F4d0fU1@mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: pcls6.std.com 1359493293 16453 192.74.137.71 (29 Jan 2013 21:01:33
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:01:33 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:iM3aI1XMiyvvQKl4EdssDI+R+gk=
X-Received-Bytes: 2218
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: 2013-01-29T16:01:33-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> writes:

> The limits in ARM 2.2(14) apply to line length and (separately, IMO) to
> lexical element length. While 200 characters is IMO overkill for an
> identifier, which is a lexical element, it is not overkill for a string
> literal, which is also a lexical element.

The limit on string literals is different, though, because if you
need to interface to a 400-character mangled linker symbol,
you can concatenate several shorter string literals in the pragma.

> I could live with, say, a 32-character identifier length limit, but a
> 32-character limit on string literal would be uncomfortable, to say it
> nicely. The 200-character requirement in ARM 2.2(14) feels about right
> to me.

I'm opposed to such limitations, unless they really buy you something,
which I don't think is the case here.  It's fine to have an option
that lets users impose limits on themselves, but they shouldn't be
built into programs.

- Bob