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]>
From: Joel Seidman <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:32:53 -0700
Reply-To: Joel Seidman <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (23 lines)
Mail*Link( SMTP               with considered harmful? (was: Compilation
speed dataI

Robert I. Eachus said:

<<I've actually had to convince projects to accept guidelines...
(More than six withs on a package spec, or fifteen on a package body
indicates that there is restructuring that should be considered.  There are
good arguments for having more withs on the main program, but a with on a
subunit is almost always an indication of a design problem.) >>

I found this very interesting. I've always considered minimizing with's a
good design goal, evidencing good choice of modularity. But I'm sure many
programmers I work with are not aware of the concept you are advocating.
While most would never (almost never) use a "goto", many would add a "with"
at the drop of a hat if it would "make the program work". Are there specific
references I can cite when I argue for this? (I don't have enough
authority/stature, and saying "some guy on the internet said so" has never
worked well for me.) Or is this just basic stuff "everybody knows"?

-- Joel