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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d3b3a6fb3be6d395
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-11-25 13:40:05 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc54.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tmoran@acm.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: A tiny little integer stack package from a novice.
References: <3DE27869.6060908@acm.org>
X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader
Message-ID: <UMwE9.115471$WL3.50010@rwcrnsc54>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.234.13.56
X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com
X-Trace: rwcrnsc54 1038260404 12.234.13.56 (Mon, 25 Nov 2002 21:40:04 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 21:40:04 GMT
Organization: AT&T Broadband
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 21:40:04 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:31222
Date: 2002-11-25T21:40:04+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>There doesn't seem to be any need for access types for a bounded stack.
  As given the stack necessarily uses dynamic allocation - the user
has no choice.  If the stack was a simple declaration, the user would
have the option of simply declaring objects of type stack, or he
could do his own dynamic allocation.