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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,78b2880bc7e78e39
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-03-23 07:10:21 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!feed-out.newsfeeds.com!newsfeeds.com!feed.newsfeeds.com!newsfeeds.com!news.hitter.net!news!news.crc.com!not-for-mail
From: "David C. Hoos, Sr." <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: RISC - largish (code listed)
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 06:21:16 -0600
Organization: CRC: A wholly owned subsidiary of Thermo Electron
Message-ID: <99ff1v$8em$1@hobbes2.crc.com>
References: <mailman.985286058.25350.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <3abb0937$1@pull.gecm.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.175.145.56
X-Trace: hobbes2.crc.com 985350015 8662 198.175.145.56 (23 Mar 2001 12:20:15
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@crc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Mar 2001 12:20:15 GMT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:6022
Date: 2001-03-23T12:20:15+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Martin Dowie" <martin.dowie@baesystems.com> wrote in message
news:3abb0937$1@pull.gecm.com...
> Beard, Frank <beardf@spawar.navy.mil> wrote in message
> news:mailman.985286058.25350.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org...
> > Any particular reason you don't use
> "System.Address_To_Access_Conversions"?
>
> we do - in the body. This package converts one access type to another
access
> type by converting to system.address on route. So you can do dangerous
> things
> in a type safe manner.
>
> If there is a simpler way of doing this (type safely) then please let me
> know! :-)

As a matter of good style (regardless of simplicity) it's always a good idea
to
hide implementation details from the specification, even when the
implementation is only an instantiation of a language-defined generic unit.
This allows refinement of the implementation without changing the
specification and thereby forcing recompilation of all of the client units.