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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.157.45.50 with SMTP id v47mr10607654ota.105.1495407347857;
        Sun, 21 May 2017 15:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.157.40.242 with SMTP id s105mr423014ota.5.1495407347814;
 Sun, 21 May 2017 15:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!67no1248159itx.0!news-out.google.com!m134ni5232itb.0!nntp.google.com!67no1243695itx.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 15:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <OVcUA.31686$B6.10800@fx02.am4>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=173.71.201.205;
 posting-account=QF6XPQoAAABce2NyPxxDAaKdAkN6RgAf
NNTP-Posting-Host: 173.71.201.205
References: <bd5b3107-709d-46b9-b29b-fd15e8a6e265@googlegroups.com>
 <ofq943$14v4$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <4a47e4cd-829c-4451-abf1-82cf60b67706@googlegroups.com>
 <0efda5a1-b674-4632-8728-4586b52b8d34@googlegroups.com>
 <OVcUA.31686$B6.10800@fx02.am4>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <626db49e-f9bc-46dc-9a1b-e6434cfb54aa@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Preventing private procedure visibility being made public through
 extension
From: Jere <jhb.chat@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 22:55:47 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:46848
Date: 2017-05-21T15:55:47-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 5:16:32 AM UTC-4, Chris Moore wrote:
> On 21/05/2017 01:51, Jere wrote:
> 
> > Or perhaps if Ada supported constructors that were not
> > dispatchable and that were not inherited that might
> > also work.  I would need to think about it a bit
> > to be sure about that though.  Just an off the cuff
> > thought.
> 
> If you put the constructors in child packages then they aren't inherited.

Yes, I agree.  In my case, the base type is already provided and the
constructing procedures are in the same package, so that is what
is causing my initial problem.  I don't have control over the library
unfortunately.