From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Subunits of packages vs. subunits of subprograms
Date: 1996/07/21
Date: 1996-07-21T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DuwKL6.Lsx@world.std.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 31EA9976.5CD6@csehp3.mdc.com
In article <31EA9976.5CD6@csehp3.mdc.com>,
James A. Squire <m193884@CSEHP3.MDC.COM> wrote:
>.... assuming that the only separates one uses are packages. Some of us
>use separates for subprograms within a package, for the reasons implied
>by David Morton in his last posting on this thread, and so for us, child
>units certainly do not obsolete subunits "in many instances."
Library units (i.e. child units) can be procedures, too.
- Bob
P.S. IMHO most library units should be private library units.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-07-21 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-07-11 0:00 Subunits of packages vs. subunits of subprograms Tucker Taft
1996-07-11 0:00 ` David Morton
1996-07-11 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-07-13 0:00 ` Michael Feldman
1996-07-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1996-07-11 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-07-15 0:00 ` James A. Squire
1996-07-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff [this message]
1996-07-24 0:00 ` JamesS1889
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox