TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
X-To: Robin Reagan <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 12:16:35 -0500
Reply-To: Stephen Leake <[log in to unmask]>
From: Stephen Leake <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: Robin Reagan's message of "Sat, 4 Nov 2000 12:46:13 -0700"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version: 1.0
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (24 lines)
Robin Reagan <[log in to unmask]> writes:

> Hi all,
> <snip <rant> on using 'use'>

This has come up many times before, and probably will again. Not
having use clauses can make it easier to find "where things come
from". But a much better way is to have a tool. Emacs ada-mode
together with GNAT provide such a tool. Compile the reused components
(they do compile, or they wouldn't be reusable?), then use Emacs to
browse the Ada source code. Put the cursor on an identifier, hit ^c^d,
and you are popped to the definition. Works whether "use" is used or

Any chance this can get in the new FAQ?

Having said that, I prefer to not use "use" in specs, to make the
origin of things clearer. But I use "use" in bodies, to make the logic
of the computation clearer (long selected names get in the way).

-- Stephe