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: 103376,95b198768e6c3970
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Mats Weber <Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch>
Subject: Re: Protected vs. unprotected objects
Date: 1997/12/19
Message-ID: <349A84AB.7EFAA60A@elca-matrix.ch>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 308577756
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <34984B64.163C@mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: ELCA Matrix SA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-12-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Terry Devine wrote:
> 
> I'd like to be able to switch back and forth between protected and
> unprotected objects to be able to experiment with protection at various
> levels of a data structure.  However, if I read the LRM correctly, it
> would require major trauma (e.g., object.routine <-> routine(object)) .
> Does anyone have a good solution?

One more vote in favor of package types :-)