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 >>from >> 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? yes. >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. dale