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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,579fe8b368f918a7,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Dale Stanbrough <dale@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re-exporting features from private packages...
Date: 1997/02/11
Message-ID: <5dp10k$19h$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 218461024
Distribution: world
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-XXMessage-ID: <AF26532E0A011B17@obibicut.cs.rmit.edu.au>
Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-02-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Ada prevents a public package withing a private package presumably to
prevent the private info being exported. However this rule seems too
restrictive.

A simple rule change would seem to allow a much more flexible use of
private packages that would not compromise security. If a package
spec was allowed to 'with' a private package, but only refer to it in
its private section, it would seem we could have the best of both worlds.

This could be signalled by a special syntax...

	with private Blah; use Blah;


or simply by allowing it, with no change in syntax.

Are there any reasons why this would not be a good thing?


Dale