Re: Compiler complaint legal?

["Jean-Pierre Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1233 bytes --]

"Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> a �crit dans le message news: Lo5Y6.2832$yp1.84754@www.newsranger.com...
> In article <mailman.993057563.10765.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>, M. A. Alves
> says...
> >
> >Package O defines type O.  GNAT does not recognize the type here:
> >
> >with O; use O;
> >procedure O_Test is
> >  Object: O; -- HERE
>
> I don't believe you can have packages and types with the same name in the same
> scope. Under the circumstances, I'd want to keep the package name.
Yes you can. However, the main rule is that something is use-visible only if it does not conflict with a name that would be
otherwise visible.
Therefore, O designates the package (which is directly visible) and not the type (which is only use-visible).

> You should probably aviod naming things the same as their enclosing package.
Certainly

>On
> the other hand, this is yet another reason to aviod the use clause.
Certainly not. The use clause has no effect in that case: when there is any risk of ambiguity, it nicely steps back. The "O" is the
same if there were no use clause.

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (rosen@adalog.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://www.adalog.fr