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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAD_ENC_HEADER,BAYES_20,
	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,aee6065fc75bfcb4
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Stefan M=?iso-8859-1?Q?=FChlebach <ia94mueh@htl-bw.ch>?=
Subject: Re: Overlaying of methods.
Date: 1997/10/07
Message-ID: <343967BA.598C@htl-bw.ch>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 278963194
References: <34310F93.41C6@htl-bw.ch> <343131AC.6D6@bix.com>
 <34325DA2.41C6@htl-bw.ch> <EHDsGD.7ED@world.std.com>
X-Complaints-To: news@ubnnews.unisource.ch
X-Trace: ubnnews.unisource.ch 876177127 4859 (None) 147.86.130.103
Organization: HTL Brugg-Windisch
Reply-To: ia94mueh@htl-bw.ch
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-10-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Hi Robert

Thank you very much for your help.
It is true that if both 'Init'-procedures has the same parameter 
profile every thing is allright. And in this case it was very easy 
to redesign the procedures to have the same parameter profile.

But I'm still asking me why an explicit call 
(Pack1.Pack2.Pack3.Init(...)) doesn't work.

The sources are part of a class library for Motif programming. I'm 
not the designer - I just trying to make it run at least... :-(

I noticed that the one who wrote the original files made this 
mistake (trying to override a parent procedure by a child procedure 
with a different parameter profile) almost in every package.

-Stefan