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,LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a85dd10bdbdb69d4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-12-10 07:31:39 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!server3.netnews.ja.net!south.jnrs.ja.net!server2.netnews.ja.net!pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk!solway.cl.cam.ac.uk!sjm217 From: news01+Steven.Murdoch@cl.cam.ac.uk (Steven Murdoch) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Giving a package specification access to the private types of another package Date: 10 Dec 2002 15:31:37 GMT Organization: University of Cambridge, England Sender: sjm217@solway.cl.cam.ac.uk (Steven Murdoch) Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: solway.cl.cam.ac.uk X-Newsreader: xrn 9.02 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:31644 Date: 2002-12-10T15:31:37+00:00 List-Id: In article , "John Cupak" writes: >What about using a private package? Well I made the package spec of B.A private and it fixed the problem. I assume this made the package private or do you mean something else? When I tried to make the package body of B.A private but this gave the error "cannot have private package body". Steven Murdoch.