From: jamess1889@aol.com (JamesS1889)
Subject: Re: Subunits of packages vs. subunits of subprograms
Date: 1996/07/24
Date: 1996-07-24T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4t50je$k5j@newsbf02.news.aol.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 31EA9976.5CD6@csehp3.mdc.com
In article <DuwKL6.Lsx@world.std.com>, bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A
Duff) writes:
>Library units (i.e. child units) can be procedures, too.
Dohh!!!!! I didn't know that. Well, then I guess Robert's answer makes
more sense. Of course, the visibility is still at the end of the package,
not somewhere in the middle. I guess as long as you declare specs for all
internal subprograms, there's really no reason not to make them child
units.
James Squire
mailto:ja_squire@csehp3.mdc.com
MDA Avionics Tools & Processes
McDonnell Douglas Aerospace http://www.mdc.com
Opinions expressed here are my own and NOT my company's
"Only one Earth Captain has ever survived battle with a Minbari fleet. He
is behind me.
You are in front of me. If you value your lives, be somewhere else!"
-- Delenn, "Severed Dreams"
prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-07-24 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-07-11 0:00 Subunits of packages vs. subunits of subprograms Tucker Taft
1996-07-11 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-07-11 0:00 ` David Morton
1996-07-11 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-07-13 0:00 ` Michael Feldman
1996-07-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-07-15 0:00 ` James A. Squire
1996-07-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-07-24 0:00 ` JamesS1889 [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox