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-Thread: 103376,2948948ddf794344
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Adam Beneschan" <adam@irvine.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Stupid question
Date: 13 Apr 2007 11:50:56 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1176490256.475714.83950@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>
References: <qmtteppxaswx.15h05see2ip7t.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1176414032.163717.31900@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
   <1176415338.362267.115580@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
   <1pyl2asiynhjs.117mopb54gcj7$.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1176478553.026938.254630@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
   <190oqb9t3eplx$.ffakhbeqreff$.dlg@40tude.net>
   <1176488062.807119.67530@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1176490257 28154 127.0.0.1 (13 Apr 2007 18:50:57
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:50:57 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <1176488062.807119.67530@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
 rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.7.12-1.3.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122;
   posting-account=cw1zeQwAAABOY2vF_g6V_9cdsyY_wV9w
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14992
Date: 2007-04-13T11:50:56-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Apr 13, 11:14 am, I wrote:

> On Apr 13, 10:12 am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 13 Apr 2007 08:35:53 -0700, Adam Beneschan wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 13, 1:20 am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> > > wrote:
>
> > >> Are you saying that it is illegal to refer to generic children of generic
> > >> packages as generic packages? I don't see where 12.7 states it. 12.7(4):
>
> > >> "The generic_package_name shall denote a generic package (the template for
> > >> the formal package); the formal package is an instance of the template."
>
> > >> A.B is definitely a generic package to me.
>
> > > Go back to 4.1.3.  When you're specifying an expanded name, you can't
> > > use a prefix unless the prefix denotes a package, or an enclosing
> > > named construct.
>
> > This does not outlaw A.B, it just cannot. A trivial counter example is:
>
> > with A.B;  -- This is 100% legal
>
> > With clause is defined in 10.1.2(4) as "with <name>". Here <name> is the
> > same as in 12.7. It refers to 4.1 and is resolved to <selected_component>.
>
> > Any language lawyers here?
>
> 10.1.6(2)

OK, let me clarify that.  I checked the Ada 95 manual when I wrote
that response, but things have been rearranged a bit; the relevant
rule is now 10.1.6(6).  It's 10.1.6(2) in the Ada 95 manual.  If you
read AARM 10.1.6(6.a/2), that should clarify everything for you.

                                    -- Adam