From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,92c39a3be0a7f17d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-06 17:44:55 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news-x2.support.nl!easynet-monga!easynet.net!diablo.netcom.net.uk!netcom.net.uk!psiuk-p2!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail
From: "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Future with Ada
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 10:03:24 -0500
Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc
Message-ID: <a65b3u$q6a$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
References: <mailman.1005328653.20306.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <3wdH7.20135$xS6.32614@www.newsranger.com> <9tqete0gqc@drn.newsguy.com>
 <3C0924D6.2B5A3087@adaworks.com>
 <250220022121494455%thehouseofcards@remove.this.part.mac.com>
 <3C7B0B13.3080003@worldnet.att.net> <3C7D1C89.2000803@home.com>
 <mailman.1014918362.4599.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <3C7E7CAD.7070504@mail.com> <3C7FB9D2.D9C6E055@boeing.com>
 <3C81DF1F.9000503@mail.com> <a5tmpv$aek$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>
 <3C83A112.6080302@mail.com> <3C84223C.A356F466@adaworks.com>
 <3C853A04.34826F39@despammed.com> <a63fda$er$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <a64vhv$f90$1@bob.news.rcn.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk
X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1015427006 26826 136.170.200.133 (6 Mar 2002 15:03:26
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk
NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Mar 2002 15:03:26 GMT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20882
Date: 2002-03-06T15:03:26+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Well the nice thing is that since it has no semantic meaning, it wouldn't
really impact the compiler in a difficult way if it were added. Since its
pretty much "noise", you would have 100% upward compatibility with existing
code and would just need some parser changes to detect the label & make sure
it matched at the end.

Would it be attractive to be able to do something like:

Outer_Check: if (Some_Boolean) then
    Inner_Check: if (Some_Other_Boolean) then
        Some_Statement ;
    end if Inner_Check ;
end if Outer_Check ;

I suppose it would help when you have really long chunks of code inside the
ifs.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/

"Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.FrankLho@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:a64vhv$f90$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > Why not for "if" statements and
> > "case" statements?
>
> That's not a bad idea, given that Ada programmer frequenly include a
comment
> at the end of an "if" or "case" statement to indicate which statement is
> ending.
>
>
>