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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no 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!news4.google.com!news.germany.com!feed.xsnews.nl!border-1.ams.xsnews.nl!68.142.88.75.MISMATCH!hwmnpeer01.ams!news.highwinds-media.com!feeder1.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!news.netcologne.de!nhp.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Stupid question
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <qmtteppxaswx.15h05see2ip7t.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1176414032.163717.31900@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
 <1176415338.362267.115580@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
 <1pyl2asiynhjs.117mopb54gcj7$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1176478553.026938.254630@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 19:12:44 +0200
Message-ID: <190oqb9t3eplx$.ffakhbeqreff$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Apr 2007 19:11:52 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 0f9eb5f3.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=L[WSY0Al@V>RLigj];iP=84IUK<Cl32<14Fo<]lROoR14nDHegD_]R5L]1?5[\in_8DNcfSJ;bb[5IRnRBaCd<M>5FJ2g=S^o=>94C=0EPJFi;
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14988
Date: 2007-04-13T19:11:52+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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?

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de