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=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d10596e187e90822
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com>
Subject: Re: Private Children
Date: 1999/06/21
Message-ID: <7klja3$c0p$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 492096613
References: <m3bteacxb8.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x30.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Jun 21 14:47:36 1999 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.6 [en] (WinNT; I)
Date: 1999-06-21T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <m3bteacxb8.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>,
  Matthew Heaney <matthew_heaney@acm.org> wrote:
> Can a public child package with its private sibling?
>

Almost exactly one month ago, I posted the exact same question.
Go to deja.com and search for a thread titled "Children of private
compilation units" to see the discussion.

As I remember, it went something like this: Gnat doesn't accept it, and
Robert Dewar says its not legal Ada. ObjectAda and GreenHills do accept
it, and Tucker Taft says it *is* legal Ada. I offered to send in a bug
report to the appropriate vendor, if a consensus could be reached on
which one was in error. Currenly there appears to be no such consensus.

--
T.E.D.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.