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: 103376,45abc3b718b20aa3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Dennison <dennison@iag.net>
Subject: Re: Two ideas for the next Ada standard
Date: 1996/09/04
Message-ID: <322D0803.3E5E@iag.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 178345364
references: <5009h5$ir4@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov>
 <503sbo$j45@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <DwyFuC.E0K@world.std.com>
 <507akg$t9u@krusty.irvine.com> <Dx05yF.Jpo@world.std.com>
 <dewar.841529656@schonberg>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: The Dennison Family
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I)
Date: 1996-09-04T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
> 

> Two things we have considered adding as options to GNAT, which are not
> extensions, merely source representation issues, are to allow the
> private part to appear in a separate file, or to allow it to appear
> in the body.

Wouldn't that make package bodies dependant on the BODIES of every package
that they "with" (even indirectly)? It seems like that could really balloon
compilation times. How would the inevitable circular dependancies be handled?

-- 
T.E.D.
email    - mailto:dennison@iag.net
homepage - http://www.iag.net/~dennison