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,c2f62556e56c9683 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: xl@home.com Subject: Re: 'with'ing and 'use'ing Date: 2000/02/29 Message-ID: <38BC55F7.D3647B92@home.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 591521557 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <38BC11AB.3733FF5A@home.com> <38BC2AC9.9967925B@acm.org> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news1.sttls1.wa.home.com 951866855 24.0.225.174 (Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:27:35 PST) Organization: @Home Network MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:27:35 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-02-29T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Sorry... Operat'ors'. Jeffrey Carter wrote: > > xl@home.com wrote: > > > > Actually, the idea of not "Use"ing packages is quite common. But you > > are right, the effect of not pulling in the operators for defined types > > can get a bit irritating. My project saw this early on and allows the > > use of the "use type xxxx;" statement to circumvent the need for the > > functional notation use of operators such as ">=" etc... The 'use type' > > statement has the effect of providing visibility to all operations on > > the type specified without haveing to resort to a general use clause on > > the entire package surrounding the type in question. Quite handy and > > much more readable. > > This is incorrect: "use type" does not provide visibility to "all > operations". Use type provides visibility to operators; operations that > are not operators still require dot notation. > > Jeff Carter