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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,9aa4352fa83d37dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-03 10:22:34 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Main subprogram at library level Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 12:21:27 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <104c8i34oc8uj59@corp.supernews.com> References: <1047ia2f8afucd9@corp.supernews.com> <104a370t2sred07@corp.supernews.com> <7qa1c.16379$yZ1.8619@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6037 Date: 2004-03-03T12:21:27-06:00 List-Id: "Jeffrey Carter" wrote in message news:7qa1c.16379$yZ1.8619@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net... > Randy Brukardt wrote: > > > AI-344 proposes to remove the restriction altogether. Certainly a better > > idea than eliminating it in one weird place... > > Eliminating it altogether, if possible, would be nice. I was coming from > the position that the restriction is necessary. If it's not necessary, > why do we have it? Well, the AI proposed replacing this restriction by a bunch of others, intended to prevent objects of a nested type from "leaking" out into an outer scope (which is the real problem that has to be solved). The question that hasn't been really answered is whether the proposed restrictions are sufficient to solve the problem, and whether nested dispatching is really implementable. Randy.