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,fa2cc518ef3b992c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: tagged types extensions - language design question
Date: 2000/01/27
Message-ID: <389088A3.6BD25457@earthlink.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 578397860
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <s90mu0hg7q538@corp.supernews.com>
 <ER_j4.621$Sa2.16708@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-ELN-Date: Thu Jan 27 10:04:31 2000
X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net
X-Trace: newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net 948996271 198.94.156.19 (Thu,
 27 Jan 2000 10:04:31 PST)
Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc.
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 10:04:31 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-01-27T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

That should work, but the question was why couldn't it be done in one
step.  (I don't know.)

Matthew Heaney wrote:

> In article <s90mu0hg7q538@corp.supernews.com> , "Vladimir Olensky"
> <vladimir_olensky@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Why don't you just declare these types in separate packages?
>
> package P is
>
>   type T is tagged private;
>
> private
>   type T is tagged record ...;
> end P;
>
> package P.C is
>
>   type T1_Public is
>     abstract new T with record
>       Something : Some_Other_Type;
>     end record;
>
>   type T1 is new T1_Public with private;
>
> private
>   type T1 is new T1_Public with record ... ;
> end P.C;
>
> > package P is
> >
> >    type T is tagged private;
> >
> >    type T1 is new T with
> >       record with private
> >                  something: some_type;
> >       and record;
> >
> > private
> >
> >    type T is tagged with
> >       record
> >            ID : Integer;
> >       end record;
> >
> >    type T1 is new T with
> >       record
> >           thing : some_other_type;
> >       end record;
> >
> > end P;
> >
> > Instead I should do this in two steps.
> >   1. to extend  private part   and then
> >   2. to extend  public part
> > or vice versa.
> >
> > Due to that type T1 has inheritance_depth = 3
> > instead of inheritance_depth =  2.
> >
> > LRM (3.9.1) says:
> >   Every type extension is a tagged type,
> > and is EITHER a record extension OR a private
> > extension of some other tagged type.
> >
> >     It would be interesting to know what were
> > the reasons not to allow to have BOTH a record
> > extension AND a private extension at the same time.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Vladimir Olensky
> >
> >