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,b7dc7082d345b1e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: package dependence question
Date: 2000/05/29
Message-ID: <8gtvnn$g6f$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 628613949
References: <8gt19i$1cm8@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x54.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon May 29 14:44:10 2000 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 2000-05-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <8gt19i$1cm8@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
  Carl Banks <oaf@psu.edu> wrote:
> However, packages can't with each other, meaning that types A
> and B can't store access types to each other if they are
> defined in separate packages.

This is wrong, or at least over broad. It is fine to have
two packages A and B, where the body of each package with's
the other package and uses its declared types.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.