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: 2002-03-28 01:51:50 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: 28 Mar 2002 01:51:50 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <6a6390b8.0203280151.6681fd8f@posting.google.com>
References: <6a6390b8.0203230702.14c071c1@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.243.118.226
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1017309110 28556 127.0.0.1 (28 Mar 2002 09:51:50
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Mar 2002 09:51:50 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21751
Date: 2002-03-28T09:51:50+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Some background:

The CORBA IDL to Ada mapping prescribes that nested IDL modules,
interfaces, and valuetypes be mapped to child packages.
This mapping is fundamentally flawed.
Example:

// IDL
module A {
   interface B {
      typedef short type_in_b;
      void my_method ();
   };

   typedef B::type_in_b type_in_a;
};

Since the interface B is mapped to a child package A.B, it is not 
possible to map type_in_a to Ada.

The solution is to map nested IDL units to nested Ada packages.

However, IDL interfaces and valuetypes require implementations.
For example, the IDL to Ada mapping prescribes that the 
implementation of interface A::B be done in a child package of 
A.B named A.B.Impl. It would certainly be the preferable to
maintain this mapping, but that's not possible with Ada right now.

-- Oliver Kellogg