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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,6161bc9aa025a9a3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "James A. Squire" Subject: Re: Subunits of packages vs. subunits of subprograms Date: 1996/07/15 Message-ID: <31EA9976.5CD6@csehp3.mdc.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 168857945 sender: Ada programming language references: comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: MDA Avionics Tools & Processes mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (X11; I; HP-UX A.09.01 9000/715) Date: 1996-07-15T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > You realize of course that subunits are, in many instances, obsoleted by > the notion of child units. Most, but not all, uses of subunits in Ada 83 > are more comfortably replaced by the use of child units in Ada 95. > So to a certain extent subunits are being provided for backwards > compatibility. .... assuming that the only separates one uses are packages. Some of us use separates for subprograms within a package, for the reasons implied by David Morton in his last posting on this thread, and so for us, child units certainly do not obsolete subunits "in many instances." -- James Squire MDA Avionics Tools & Processes ja_squire@csehp3.mdc.com Opinions expressed here are my own and NOT my company's "one of these days I'm going to better myself by going to Knight school" "You'll be a web knight instead of a web page!"