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-Thread: 103376,901038687c38f61c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newshosting.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!posts.news.twtelecom.net!nnrp2.twtelecom.net!not-for-mail
From: "Matthew Heaney" <mheaney@on2.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <M3Ocd.237$5i5.72@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>
 <9175719.eWmeGlFrVu@linux1.krischik.com>
Subject: Re: Idiom for a class and an object in Ada
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:40:58 -0400
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Message-ID: <41741971$0$91011$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net>
Organization: Time-Warner Telecom
NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Oct 2004 19:28:49 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 21f9d5f8.news.twtelecom.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=TLne:9]5fGE:9cegTIC^\@C_A=>8kQj6MhHXa^^g6TZDDFB78Rk0MABdYZAA8S:<l@]_IdP?^>V?N
X-Complaints-To: abuse@twtelecom.net
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5412
Date: 2004-10-18T19:28:49+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Martin Krischik" <krischik@users.sourceforge.net> wrote in message 
news:9175719.eWmeGlFrVu@linux1.krischik.com...
> Marin David Condic wrote:
>
>> Suppose I have a class with one or a limited set of objects. The objects
>> are "global" in the sense that they hang around from program startup
>> thru the entire life of execution. An example would be an A/D Converter
>> class - My little control box might have 3 or 4 A/Ds in it - they're
>> always there and I want the data associated with them to be static (not
>> declared on the stack.)
>>
>> Question: What is the preferred Ada idiom for defining such a creature?

See my previous post.  You could either declare the known instances in the 
package itself:

package AD_Converters is
   type AD_Converter (<>) is limited private;
   ... -- ops

   function Huey return AD_Converter;
   function Dewey return AD_Converter;
   function Louie return AD_Converter;

end AD_Converters;

The other possibility is to declare each function as a child:

package AD_Converters.Huey_Converters is
   function Huey return AD_Converter;
end;

Alternatively, you can hide the package like this:

function AD_Converters.Huey return AD_Converter; --spec

private package AD_Converters.Huey_Converters is
   Huey : AD_Converter;
   .. --whatever else is necessary for the Huey object
end;

with AD_Converters.Huey_Conveters;
function AD_Converters.Huey return AD_Converter is --body
begin
   return Huey_Converters.Huey;
end;


Whether you declare all the objects up in the root package or as child 
functions is determined by whether your application always manipulates the 
objects as a group (that's the case in the genealogy example), and how many 
unique dependencies each object has (if the library units you need to make a 
Huey object are the same as the library units you need to make a Dewey 
object, then they might as well be declared together).