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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!dciem!array!len From: len@array.UUCP (Leonard Vanek) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Use of "is separate" and compilatio Message-ID: <60@array.UUCP> Date: 1 Dec 89 18:29:41 GMT References: <20600021@inmet> <3076@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> Reply-To: len@array.UUCP (Leonard Vanek) Organization: Array Systems Computing, Inc., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA List-Id: In article <3076@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> arny@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (arny.b.engelson,wh,) writes: >In article <20600021@inmet> stt@inmet.inmet.com writes: >The visibility of the subunit doesn't change by integrating it into >the parent. If proper scoping of declarations is done (i.e. only what >really should be visible is visible), I don't see the problem. >> subunits cause havoc with sophisticated optimizers, >>especially subunits within subprograms. > >Again, if proper scope is maintained for variables, there should be very >few that to which this would apply. If "proper name scoping" is used to avoid the potential pitfalls of subunits, how does the subunit differ substantially from a package? I think that the alternative to subunits in this case is not to place them in-line in the parent procedure or package, but to make them packages in their own right. Why do we need to use the "is separate" mechanism? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Leonard Vanek UUCP: ... uunet!attcan!lsuc!array!len Array Systems Computing Inc. or ... utzoo!dciem!array!len 5000 Dufferin St. Suite 200 or lsuc!array!len@ai.toronto.edu Downsview, Ont. M3H 5T5 Phone: (416) 736-0900 Canada FAX: (416) 736-4715