Ada2005 temp solo child (was: Re: The Dreaded "Missing Subunits"

[Peter Hermann <ica2ph@iris16.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>]

Peter Amey <peter.amey@praxis-cs.co.uk> wrote:
> grandparent-parent-unit_name.adb for subunits.

In this context I have a question to language lawyers:
Since it may be practical to temporarily have package children
without having the corresponding parent, why should it be 
prohibited by the standard to allow this?
Likewise e.g. ada.text_io could turn to orphan
since package ada may easily be missing.

While developing an application, I have e.g. a parent.child
but not yet a parent package, which may or may come later.
Now my compiler forces me to have the parent.
I would prefer the ada standard would force the compiler
to allow parentless children.
Did I ignore some important aspect?

-- 
--Peter Hermann(49)0711-685-3611 fax3758 ica2ph@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de
--Pfaffenwaldring 27 Raum 114, D-70569 Stuttgart Uni Computeranwendungen
--http://www.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de/homes/ph/
--Team Ada: "C'mon people let the world begin" (Paul McCartney)