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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,dfe340a115a0bc1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-04 06:34:11 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.com!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail From: Martin Krischik Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Naming convention for classes? Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 15:09:49 +0100 Organization: AdaCL Message-ID: <2769817.4d6m3TcVZG@linux1.krischik.com> References: Reply-To: krischik@users.sourceforge.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1075905249 05 9977 QezFG7m6Vk-rSci2 040204 14:34:09 X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@t-online.de X-ID: EkQm3QZOQeAWuMkQaMBt6c6ceYAZiZIEXw3rLdOhJPoIDoVW6o5PrD User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5223 Date: 2004-02-04T15:09:49+01:00 List-Id: Preben Randhol wrote: > On 2004-02-04, Peter C Chapin wrote: >> In article , tmoran@acm.org says... >> >>> Remember that a package can contain more than one type definition, and >>> in general a package is a higher level of abstraction than any one of >>> its contents. >> >> Yes, I understand... although in the case where one is trying to build a >> "class" in the sense meant by other object oriented languages, using a >> package to wrap up a single type and its operations also seems to be >> sensible as well. I can see that this is a matter of debate. > > Why should one limit a package to contain a single type? Unless you want the classes to be "friend"s (in a C++ sence) you must put the in different packages. With Regards Martin -- mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net http://www.ada.krischik.com