Re: Limited Use Clause

[tynor@pyr.gatech.EDU (Steve Tynor)]

In article <8812060022.AA26972@ucsd.edu> brian@telesoft.UUCP (Brian D. Nettleton @spot) writes:
>addition of a "limited" use clause.  This clause would allow
>direct visibility of only the implicit infix operators of a visible part
>of a particular package.  I do beleive this request does probably
...
>code (i.e. renaming "=" and "+" over and over again even though they have 
>the "standard" Ada definition).

But why limit this to only infix operators? How about borrowing an idea 
from Modula2?

 	with XYZ;
 	use XYZ."=", XYZ."/=", XYZ.PUSH, XYZ.POP;
 	package ...

I agree that having to either rename or explicitly use XYZ."=" (A, 1) is a
pain and tends to confuse the code more than clarify it.  

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Progress means replacing something wrong with something more subtly wrong.
                     
    Steve Tynor
    Georgia Tech Research Institute
    tynor@gitpyr.gatech.edu