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: 103376,5c89acd494ea9116
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!eweka.nl!lightspeed.eweka.nl!194.134.4.77.MISMATCH!news2.euro.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 23:37:33 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus.rm.tsoh@maps.futureapps.de>
Organization: #
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Self pointer in limited record
References: <1183577468.034566.57830@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
 <1188578849.187422.280620@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
 <9fy1xoukz1e3$.h574sqmiauri$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <46d968ee$0$30368$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <137iu0lr82dtb$.wqy3zjz2vr9q.dlg@40tude.net>
 <46d972e8$0$30384$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <1alyfwaig93sk$.99oy269uon$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <46d9c138$0$4531$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <1rt8kdcrj6tf.1qgvycc6vh357$.dlg@40tude.net>
In-Reply-To: <1rt8kdcrj6tf.1qgvycc6vh357$.dlg@40tude.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <46db2bf4$0$7699$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 02 Sep 2007 23:32:36 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4471755d.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=c0ElK0dnMg>;]cDoEWD6A4A9EHlD;3Yc24Fo<]lROoR1<`=YMgDjhg2WW8OgNdQ186PCY\c7>ejV8>`a?U9ni?g=K3@TCGIY:m1
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:1662
Date: 2007-09-02T23:32:36+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> Packages are to bind
> together coupled reusable things.

I agree with "bind together" as a use of packages.
But reuse of a package is an optional feature of a package:
Suppose every package is reusable. Then most of us will have
lost their jobs as programmers because every problem domain
object can be mapped to one of the available reusable packages.


> A package within an implementation cannot
> serve this purpose.

Yes. It needn't.

> Your example with a farm should better be a container
> type with house and barn being objects. Farms can have two or more barns.

You can make any program arbitrarily complex.
A car has one steering wheel. Why is a simple
module (i.e., a package, not a type) inadequate.