Re: Package's private parts and protected types

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Mon, 8 Feb 2010 02:54:17 -0800 (PST), Hibou57 (Yannick Duch�ne) wrote:

> On 8 f�v, 11:20, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 8 Feb 2010 00:30:12 -0800 (PST), Martin wrote:
>>> This is true of task types too.
>>
>> I don't think so. The task specification does not expose barriers and local
>> variables of its body. But the protected type specification does its
>> private operations and components:

> I still think so :p
> What about a task entry which should be accessible by some entities of
> the package implementation ? I'm not talking about these task's
> private entries intended for Requeue, I'm talking about an entry which
> should be publicly available while still being available, not only
> from the task itself, and also from the package body which hold the
> task implementation.

Yes, OK. Maybe it is not so offending as private components of a protected
type, but you are right. "C++-ish" notation (wasn't it actually before
C++?) poison is at work here as well.

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