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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.182.213.4 with SMTP id no4mr9335154obc.21.1435433874055;
 Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.140.38.102 with SMTP id s93mr99474qgs.37.1435433874028; Sat,
 27 Jun 2015 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!j8no582311igd.0!news-out.google.com!4ni9753qgh.1!nntp.google.com!z60no452382qgd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 12:37:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <lyegkxhti6.fsf@pushface.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.99.95.58;
 posting-account=sDyr7QoAAAA7hiaifqt-gaKY2K7OZ8RQ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.99.95.58
References: <9894cde7-2cf8-4060-be65-857812ad7b09@googlegroups.com>
 <mm7310$4jk$1@dont-email.me>
 <17436268-aceb-461f-bdcf-eee8436cd0e6@googlegroups.com>
 <mm9e4f$n4e$2@dont-email.me>
 <fa1fea48-bdb6-446c-8a41-a2f34a55ed16@googlegroups.com>
 <d65db4db-ada4-4705-8cec-37a994536f8b@googlegroups.com>
 <86y4jaqzdx.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <dddbc06b-c30f-4923-85b6-f3a378982238@googlegroups.com>
 <86oak5qulb.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <mmeoq7$p9f$1@dont-email.me>
 <78882aed-4063-409b-a92e-6025c3097a52@googlegroups.com>
 <mmfavj$7fc$1@dont-email.me>
 <6d3e7a4c-e691-4005-ad47-2507ed13031f@googlegroups.com>
 <lyegkxhti6.fsf@pushface.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3027f366-8a20-4e46-99c4-6d323cc4d0c2@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: What do you think about this?
From: Laurent <lutgenl@icloud.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 19:37:54 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:193807
Date: 2015-06-27T12:37:53-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Saturday, 27 June 2015 20:54:26 UTC+2, Simon Wright  wrote:
> Laurent <lutgenlaticloud.com> writes:
> 
> > It sucks that renaming function Make_Antibiotique... to function
> > Antibiotique ... doesn't work because I get conflicts between the Type
> > Antibiotique and the function. So what is the recommendation for
> > naming in this case.
> >
> > package Antibiotiques...
> >
> > type Antibiotique is private;
> >
> > function Make_Antibiotique... return Antibiotique;
> >
> > end Antibiotiques;
> 
> I'd just call it Make. The package name disambiguates.

Hm the opposite of the messages before. Who is right then? Or just a matter of taste?