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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e9f0eae6d714d11c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Gnat pretty printing
Date: 1998/12/12
Message-ID: <x7v3e6lu3eh.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 421735731
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98
References: <74lt16$9r0@romeo.logica.co.uk> <366E9E44.AA7370C7@pwfl.com>
 <74on70$m9o$1@cnn.Princeton.EDU> <36714049.2C5CE298@pwfl.com>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 913535009 nnrp-08:9423 NO-IDENT
 pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98
Organization: At Home
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-12-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Marin David Condic <condicma@bogon.pwfl.com> writes:

[..]
>     procedure Pop (
>         Item            :    out Element_Ptr_Type ;
>         List            : in out List_Type) is
[..]
> formatting style is that it is extremely regular & predictable with a
> visually pleasing alignment of related objects. I'm not sure it is
[..]

I don't think we shall ever agree on that style! The dangling ( after
Pop is my pet hate, I fear. Customisability is the best bet ..

I wrote a formatter once that allowed you to mingle formatting options
with syntax specifications, but (a) it was written in a special parser
generator which (b) targetted VMS LIB$TPARSE and (c) required
single-trackability in the grammar+options (not sure of the technical
term for that). The grammar part would have been OK, I think, but the
options were the killer .. perhaps there are programming systems in
which this sort of thing would be simple?