From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: string literals
Date: 16 Jan 1995 12:30:14 -0500
Date: 1995-01-16T12:30:14-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3feaf6$58s@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3fcdf4$65n@uuneo.neosoft.com
An absolute rule against all use clauses is misconceived and ill-advised,
but you can live with it, because the consequence is just junky hard to
read source code, and tools can hide the junk from you.
An absolute rule against all use of unchecked conversion is true folly. There
are all sorts of situations in which UC is an important tool, and completely
forbidding its use seriously cripples the language.
Sure it can be misused, so can addition and integers, but that doesn't mean
you should ban addition and integers.
Indeed the requirement of an explicit with of unchecked conversion is
precisely intended to allow *control* of the use of this important feature,
not its *elimination*.
I can't tell you how many times I have seen people decide that you can't do
something in Ada, and therefore resort to C, or whatever, just because they
have crippled Ada with silly restrictions.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1995-01-16 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <cary-110195174515@macsac09.esl.com>
1995-01-12 22:21 ` string literals Robert Dewar
[not found] ` <D2Dnpv.41u@alsys.com>
[not found] ` <3fbtgk$501@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
[not found] ` <3fcdf4$65n@uuneo.neosoft.com>
1995-01-16 17:30 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1995-01-18 13:24 ` Richard G. Hash
1995-01-21 5:20 ` Robert Dewar
1995-01-21 13:09 ` Rolf Ebert
1995-01-13 13:31 ` Pascal OBRY
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox