Re: Interfaces and private types

[Georg Bauhaus <rm.tsoh+bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>]

Philippe Tarroux schrieb:
> Randy Brukardt wrote:
>> Specifically, it violates 7.3(7.3/2): "the partial view shall be a
>> descendant of an interface type (see 3.9.4) if and only if the full 
>> type is
>> a descendant of the interface type."
>>   As written, this is illegal because type T does not have the 
>> interface Int.
> As it is written the compiler i use doesn't mention any error and i 
> interpreted this construct as legal because :
> 
> 1/ the interface is synchronized thus allowing to derive concurrent or 
> non concurrent types
> 2/ The partial view is a descendant of the interface type
> 3/ The full view precises that the partial view correspond to a 
> concurrent type but hides this detail to the user

I'd rather think that the compiler should diagnose conflicting
declaration of T in the private part as the private T does not
declare a relation with the public T.


If you do not want to derive T publicly, why not

package Test_Interfaces is

   type Int is synchronized interface;
   procedure Init (I : in out Int) is abstract;

   type T is limited private;

private

   task type T is new Int with
      overriding entry Init;
   end T;
end Test_Interfaces;