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=1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6cb2525ffbfe23ce
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com>
Subject: Re: Why both "with" and "use"?
Date: 1999/02/17
Message-ID: <7aeoo7$cg8$1@plug.news.pipex.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 445350729
References: <36C5B28C.F32C43A4@jps.net> <m2socaxfjw.fsf@wf-rch.cirr.com>
 <m3lni1ucb9.fsf@mheaney.ni.net> <7acj53$1vu@news3.newsguy.com>
 <7aejjv$tj$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET
 WorldCom)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-02-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

dennison@telepath.com wrote in message <7aejjv$tj$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
[...]
|Hmmm. Would a "use type" clause also imply a "with"? Would a "use" for a
child
|imply a "with" of its parents?


No reason why not. After all, a "with" of a child implies a "with" of its
parent (all its ancestors, in fact).

-------------------------------------------
Nick Roberts
-------------------------------------------