From: "Gavino" <invalid@invalid.invalid>
Subject: Re: Q: SPARK visibility rules and inherit annotations.
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 13:03:01 +0200
Date: 2010-05-20T13:03:01+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <85kj72Fhu9U1@mid.individual.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: op.vczdx3teule2fv@garhos
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 532 bytes --]
"Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote in message
news:op.vczdx3teule2fv@garhos...
>While sometime, I would like to better understand some choices, like the
>one I've meet, which is that it does not accept nested package
>specifications, or, more important, why it don't wants "type ... is new
>...;". If I could understand the rational behind this latter restriction,
>this could perhaps help me to redesign.
It's to avoid overloading, especially the implicit declaration of
user-defined subprograms.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-20 11:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-19 15:04 Q: SPARK visibility rules and inherit annotations Peter C. Chapin
2010-05-19 15:54 ` Phil Thornley
2010-05-19 21:29 ` Peter C. Chapin
2010-05-20 1:47 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-05-20 11:03 ` Gavino [this message]
2010-05-20 15:58 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-05-21 10:42 ` Gavino
2010-05-25 20:58 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-05-19 16:22 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-05-19 20:41 ` Gavino
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox