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-Thread: a07f3367d7,94d84e4971c0caee
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hibou57_=28Yannick_Duch=EAne=29?=
 <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Inheritance with Ada types
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 02:22:56 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <8ceb72dc-1c16-44fa-bf81-a8017e76da2e@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <ad9aca45-33dc-4765-a998-44a6b57dbe50@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>
	<92c90b37-0e9b-49f4-ab37-fbd256ed6f06@k41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
	<ir8rkh.hqm.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 77.198.58.172
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1265710976 2676 127.0.0.1 (9 Feb 2010 10:22:56
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 10:22:56 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com; posting-host=77.198.58.172;
	posting-account=vrfdLAoAAAAauX_3XwyXEwXCWN3A1l8D
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1;
	fr),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9025
Date: 2010-02-09T02:22:56-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 9 f=E9v, 10:11, Jean-Pierre Rosen <ro...@adalog.fr> wrote:
> I don't understand why people think that as soon as you have a use
> clause, you cannot use full names. If within the scope of a use clause
> you don't get what you want, or if you find that in some cases full
> names are more readable, by all mean, use full notation!
Agree with this. True that having a Use clause does not implies the
prefix notation is not available anymore.

Well, let say in this context he should not rely on the use clause to
refer to the type Parent.