From: Simon Wright on
"Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not(a)spam.acm.org> writes:

> I don't really care which of these I write. But I'd much rather READ
>
> Send (Message => ...);
>
> than
>
> Send (M => ...); -- Meaningless

Quite often (IMO) there's no need to use named association *for the
first parameter* in a case like this.

Send ("hello world", To => Server);

for example.
From: Jeffrey R. Carter on
On 07/01/2010 12:28 PM, Simon Wright wrote:
>
> Quite often (IMO) there's no need to use named association *for the
> first parameter* in a case like this.
>
> Send ("hello world", To => Server);
>
> for example.

This violates my coding standard.

--
Jeff Carter
"Ada has made you lazy and careless. You can write programs in C that
are just as safe by the simple application of super-human diligence."
E. Robert Tisdale
72
From: Per Sandberg on
Maybe,
But the sentence is readable for two legged carbon-based beings.
/P

On 07/01/2010 09:59 PM, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote:
> On 07/01/2010 12:28 PM, Simon Wright wrote:
>>
>> Quite often (IMO) there's no need to use named association *for the
>> first parameter* in a case like this.
>>
>> Send ("hello world", To => Server);
>>
>> for example.
>
> This violates my coding standard.
>
From: Stephen Leake on
"Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not(a)spam.acm.org> writes:

> so I'd probably write
>
> procedure Send (Message : in Message_Info);

Better yet:

procedure Send (Message : in <package_name>.Message);

less thinking about names required.

--
-- Stephe
From: Georg Bauhaus on
On 02.07.10 11:25, Stephen Leake wrote:
> "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not(a)spam.acm.org> writes:
>
>> so I'd probably write
>>
>> procedure Send (Message : in Message_Info);
>
> Better yet:
>
> procedure Send (Message : in <package_name>.Message);

Will this work well with AdaCore's <package_name>.Typ
convention, too?
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: made me hate programming
Next: Mysql and gnade