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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,447840d42a580dc0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-25 11:26:06 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: okellogg@freenet.de (Oliver Kellogg)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: child packages and nested packages
Date: 25 Mar 2002 11:26:06 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <6a6390b8.0203251126.8eebc37@posting.google.com>
References: <6a6390b8.0203230702.14c071c1@posting.google.com>
 <4519e058.0203250701.7819a546@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.246.11.183
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1017084366 7350 127.0.0.1 (25 Mar 2002 19:26:06
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Mar 2002 19:26:06 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21654
Date: 2002-03-25T19:26:06+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

dennison@telepath.com (Ted Dennison) wrote: 
> 
> Try declaring Pkg.Nested.Child within Pkg.

Well, my point was not wanting to do that.
Imagine Pkg to be the production of a code generator, potentially
containing hundreds of these nested packages, while Pkg.Nested.Child
is a human written extension.

One reason for wanting nested packages might be to reduce the number
of files.
Another, more important reason is that further declarations in
Pkg might depend on things from the nested packages, for example

   -- near the end of package Pkg:
   type Object_Array array (1 .. 2) of Nested.Object;

Thanks,

Oliver Kellogg