TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Nasser Abbasi <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 20 Jul 1998 20:17:04 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Nasser Abbasi <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
I forgot to add one more important point on this.

In Ada, I see why the need for something like javadoc will be less than
for Java. Becuase in Ada the specification part of the package is
separate from the body.  Hence the specification in Ada can be examined
without the clutter of the body code. in GNAT it even requires that the
specs be in a separate file on its own.

In Java (one of its weak points), is that there is no separate
specification for the package and a separate body. They are all go
togother in one file. So, the need to pull the specifcations for a Java
package out of the java file is more needed than for Ada.

I have not thought of this when I wrote earlier.

thanks,
Nasser

ATOM RSS1 RSS2