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: 103376,2e27f5c95ae373a1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: sean@graph.es.hac.com (Sean McNeil)
Subject: Re: Generic child units with Gnat
Date: 1995/03/31
Message-ID: <SEAN.95Mar31090715@graph.es.hac.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 100649474
references: <3l5q2n$6le@unix.sbu.ac.uk> <3le685$l9h@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
organization: Hughes Aircraft Company
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1995-03-31T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3le685$l9h@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (David Weller) writes:

>   --File: complexnumbers-polar.ads
>   generic
>   package ComplexNumbers.Polar is
>      procedure bar( Dummy : in FloatType);
>   end ComplexNumbers.Polar;
>
> ...
>
>   --Filename foobar.adb
>   with ComplexNumbers.Polar; -- auto visibility to parent
>   procedure FooBar is
>      package RealComplexNumbers is new ComplexNumbers( Float);
>      package PolarRealComplexNumbers is new RealComplexNumbers.Polar;
>   begin -- FooBar
>     null;
>   end FooBar;
>
  Since it appears that ComplexNumbers.Polar is only dependant on FloatType
from the parent package, wouldn't the following be better?

   --File: complexnumbers-polar.ads
   package ComplexNumbers.Polar is
      procedure bar( Dummy : in FloatType);
   end ComplexNumbers.Polar;

   --Filename foobar.adb
   with ComplexNumbers.Polar; -- auto visibility to parent
   procedure FooBar is
      package RealComplexNumbers is new ComplexNumbers( Float);
      package PolarRealComplexNumbers renames RealComplexNumbers.Polar;
   begin -- FooBar
     null;
   end FooBar;

One less generic instantiation.

Sean McNeil
smcneil@netcom.com