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,b47b15fda2aeb0b2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Two ideas for the next Ada Standard Date: 1996/09/08 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 179175305 sender: news@organon.com (news) references: <322D6D79.7317@ehs.ericsson.se> organization: Organon Motives, Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-09-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article stt@henning.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) writes: > For what it is worth, my very first "minor update" > would still be some solution to the circular dependency problem. I don't think I could over emphasize my strong agreement with this! What is the story on actually getting this adopted? > My current favorite solution, at least for experimentation purposes, > is to interpret a pragma Import on an incomplete type, or on an access type, > in a special way. For example: Hmmmm, while I see you say "experimentation purposes" here (in leu of the original "with type ..." change) I suppose the pragma approach is easy to get into standard conforming compilers... /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. 1 Williston Road, Suite 4 Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com