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: 103376,1e3f2eac5c026e3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-27 04:21:59 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!eusc.inter.net!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail
From: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Other Ada Standards (was Re: SIGada Conference)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 12:21:58 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: GMUGHDU
Message-ID: <bsjth6$dna$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
References: <468D78E4EE5C6A4093A4C00F29DF513D04B82B08@VS2.hdi.tvcabo>
   <bs9s3f$2bj2$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3FE991DD.5060301@noplace.com>
 <bebbba07.0312241216.161fb3f5@posting.google.com>
 <wccekutx599.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <3FEA5C82.8050309@noplace.com>
 <bebbba07.0312242235.33b86222@posting.google.com>
 <bselgl$k99$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <3FEB047A.1040100@noplace.com>
 <bebbba07.0312261209.412acff7@posting.google.com>
 <bsiutu$1nt$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <bsjpps$dab6p$1@ID-77047.news.uni-berlin.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de
X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1072527718 14058 134.91.1.34 (27 Dec 2003
 12:21:58 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 12:21:58 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00
 (9000/800))
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3844
Date: 2003-12-27T12:21:58+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:
: Georg Bauhaus wrote:
: 
:> For the "with and use" case, what is your interpretation of
:> "with and use A.B;"
:> Is it "with A.B; use A.B;" or is it "with A; use A.B;"?
:> Which interpretation is to be chosen?
: 
: Just allow "with" everywhere "use" is allowed. Then "use A.B" could
: literally imply "with A.B".

Hm.

if condition then     -- not Ada
  declare
    with X;
  begin
    ...;
  end;
else
  declare
    with Y;
  begin
    ...
  end;
end if;

What is the compiler to do?
 

: package X is
:   -- public things
: 
: private
:   with Something_Implementational.Not_To_Expose;
: 
: package Y is
:   package Debug is -- I'll comment it out, later
:      with Ada.Text_IO;
:      ...
:   end Debug;

why not

with Ada.Text_IO;
private package Y.Debug is

end Y.Debug;

Do you need the Debug things in further private definitions
after Debug?

: I think it is worth to investigate the possible consequences of this
: proposal.

We might end up with

package P is

   from Ada.Text_IO import Get_Line, Put_Line; --)

...
end P;