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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b023521659e212ce
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Mats Weber <Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch>
Subject: Re: Units Checking is Ada - Solicitation of Comments on Standard
 Proposal
Date: 1997/08/07
Message-ID: <33E9CDA9.645A51BB@elca-matrix.ch>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 262737402
References: <33E80CA8.3DEC@erols.com>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Organization: ELCA Matrix SA
Reply-To: Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-08-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


I had a quick look at it. I don't like the fact that operations are in the
separate (sub)package SI.Ops, because they are not part of the primitive
profile of the type Unit.

So , if you derive the type, the operations are not derived, and you cannot do
   use type SI.Unit;
to get direct access to the operators.