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