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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 103376,4d972ac0c79198a5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-14 00:56:31 PST
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 09:56:21 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rodrigo_Garc=EDa?= <rodrigo.garcia.ARROBA.epfl.ch>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020513
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Generic child units
References: <3ec12f93$1@epflnews.epfl.ch> <ubry6heul.fsf@nasa.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: lglpc31.epfl.ch
Message-ID: <3ec1f6ab$1@epflnews.epfl.ch>
X-Trace: epflnews.epfl.ch 1052898987 128.178.76.8 (14 May 2003 09:56:27 +0200)
Organization: EPFL
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed1!bredband!uio.no!newsfeed.vmunix.org!news.imp.ch!news.imp.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!epflnews.epfl.ch!not-for-mail
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37313
Date: 2003-05-14T09:56:21+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Stephen Leake wrote:
> Rodrigo Garc�a <rodrigo.garcia.ARROBA.epfl.ch> writes:
> 
> 
>>I need some enlightment in this area... Let us suppose that I have two
>>generic packages declared in separate files and one is the parent of
>>the other:
>>
>>generic
>>    type Elem is private;
>>package Parent is
>>    type Vector is array (Integer range <>) of Elem;
>>end Parent;
>>
>>generic
>>package Parent.Child is
>>    subtype Vector2D is Vector (1 .. 2);
>>end Parent.Child;
>>
>>How can I instantiate the child package 
> 
> 
> with Parent.Child;
> procedure Foo is
>    package Par is new Parent (Elem => Integer);
>    package Chi is new Par.Child;
> begin
> ...
> end Foo;
> 
> Note that the second instantiation is "Par.Child", not "Parent.Child".

   Thanks, that is one of the things I was doing wrong.

>>within the declarative region of the parent package (as required by
>>RM 10.1(18))?
> 
> 
> There is no RM 10.1 (18), at least in the copy I have (came with
> GNAT). And I don't understand the rest of the sentence, either. So I
> don't know what you mean here.

   Sorry, I meant RM 10.1.1 (18) as David C. Hoos has remarked. I still 
do not understand that requirement.

Rodrigo