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,d927b7ea9b65580a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-11-09 10:36:00 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Style: always declare subrountines?
Date: 09 Nov 2002 18:36:05 +0000
Organization: Pushface
Sender: simon@smaug.pushface.org
Message-ID: <x7vptte3816.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
References: <3dccc023$0$304$bed64819@news.gradwell.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1036866960 29289 62.49.19.209 (9 Nov 2002 18:36:00
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 18:36:00 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:30659
Date: 2002-11-09T18:36:05+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) writes:

> How do you consider this:
> 
> If one would always declare every subrountine of a package body in the 
> specification (in the public or in the private part) this excludes the
> possibility that one may mistakedly create an internal subrountine with
> the same specification as a not yet implemented public procedure and 
> forget to implement this public procedure and so get wrong program
> behavior.
> 
> Stylistic checkers for always declaring in package specification?

If you use -gnaty GNAT will require specs (well, it warns if there
aren't any). But of course they only need be as local as required; so
it's common to see

  procedure Foo;
  procedure Foo is ..

in a local scope.