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
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
X-To: Samuel Mize <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 09:00:01 +1100
Reply-To: Dale Stanbrough <[log in to unmask]>
From: Dale Stanbrough <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (45 lines)
At 1:43 PM -0600 25/11/98, Samuel Mize wrote:
>W. Wesley Groleau x4923 wrote:
>> In situations where that paradigm truly is meaningful, nothing stops you
>> defining
>Nothing helps you ensure you remembered to do so consistently, either.
>> I think new pragmas to enforce a particular non-Ada-like style are not
>> wise.  If it takes three pragmas to do it, and three for the next guy's
>> non-Ada-like style, and three for the next style idea, and ....
>> Better to just write an ASIS tool (or employ a very talented proofreader)
>> that suits your needs.
>I'm game.  How does the programmer tell the ASIS tool "this is one
>of those things for which I want you to check class purity" (or
>data-flow-design constraints, or no-nested-procedures, or whatever).

you just click the

        "check for class purity"

button on the interface of your style checking program, which has ASIS in
the background.

>Is there a mechanism other than pragma?
>Does ASIS retain comments so you can parse them?


>I'm not tied to pragmas, I'm just looking for a mechanism that will
>let an ASIS tool pick and choose where it should apply these
>constraints.  They certainly shouldn't be mandated across the
>board, that would be sillier than outlawing all "use" statements.

the asis standard is available - it's probably worth while reading to get
an idea of what you can do with it.