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=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site boulder.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!hao!nbires!boulder!geoff
From: geoff@boulder.UUCP (Geoffrey M. Clemm)
Newsgroups: net.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Implementing mutually dependent access types in separate packages
Message-ID: <384@boulder.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 7-Jul-85 21:19:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: boulder.384
Posted: Sun Jul  7 21:19:44 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 11-Jul-85 04:53:36 EDT
References: <383@boulder.UUCP>
Reply-To: geoff@boulder.UUCP (Geoffrey Clemm)
Distribution: net
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Note :

Mutually dependent access types can be implemented in separate generic
packages, but then must all be instantiated together in a single 
"implementation" package.  This approach shares many of the problems of
simply clumping all the mutually dependent types into a single package
(since in effect, that is what is being done).

Geoffrey Clemm