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 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,4d8b56262a702d36 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@organon.com (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Dispatching in Ada95 Date: 1996/04/24 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 151087987 sender: news@organon.com (news) references: organization: Organon Motives, Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-04-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <317BCF1F.6542@csehp3.mdc.com> "James A. Squire" writes: > > You're right in saying that it will check a subprogram which is > > directly visible (if you don't give a prefix). But if your parameter > > is of a class-wide type, only a subprogram with the base type of this > > class-wide type needs to be visible. > > Correction: Directly visible. Correction, not directly visible. And dispatching has nothing to do with visibility anyway. Why do you think so?????? > > Now, our main procedure T. T withes AAA, BBB and Text_IO, and uses all > > of them except BBB. > > So, you do compromise and use the use clause, then. That was my whole > question. The use clause *is* essential to dispatching. No. Not only is the use clause _NOT_ essential, it has nothing to do with it. Dispatching is a runtime thing based on the dynamic type (tag) of the operands of the particular invocation. You're just plain confused (for some reason...) > Thank you for answering my question. Just another "gotcha" of Ada95 to > note for future reference. Unfortunately, you still don't get it. There is no "gotcha" here. /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. 1 Williston Road, Suite 4 Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com