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: 103376,63a41ccea0fc803a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Simon Wright Subject: Re: Naming of Tagged Types and Associated Packages Date: 1998/08/01 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 377143426 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98 References: <6pdhfo$1br$1@platane.wanadoo.fr> <6pi0pf$df8$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6pirk1$iar$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6pknai$qst$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6pl5rh$elr$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35BF50B4.6FDCDDA0@west.raytheon.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 902039615 nnrp-01:21927 NO-IDENT pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98 Organization: At Home Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-08-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Matthew Heaney writes: > You get the idea. Everywhere where I declare a file instance, the type > is named Sequential_File. > > Now, suppose that as a build the software, or a requirement changes (not > unlikely), I realize that I need direct file access, not just sequential > access. The means I have to do a new instantiation, and everywhere > where there's a Sequential_File, there's now needs to be a Direct_File. So why not call them just File? (OK, you can't "use" with such gay abandon, good thing too :-)