Re: Package Instances???

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

In the simplest case where the generic package had no generic parameters and
only a collection of data objects & subprograms, it would look very similar
to a C++ "class" in many respects. The important part being that it would
only *look* like a C++ class. Semantically the whole analogy starts to fall
apart once you start picking at the loose threads.

Obviously, as you observe, once you start changing what the generic actually
says, the distinction between a generic package and a "class" starts
becoming more apparent. In general, I'd think it would be wise not to try to
use a generic package to represent a "class" in the way it appears to have
been intended. Its just the wrong idiom in Ada to do what a C++ class does.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Simon Wright" <simon@pushface.org> wrote in message
news:x7v8z9u7dsk.fsf@smaug.pushface.org...
>
> But different instantiations would be different "classes". I guess
> that depends on what the generic actually says.