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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2f8b28565f329871 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: local variables Date: 1998/04/10 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 342953562 References: <352E491F.4C6D@young.epc.lmms.lmco.com> X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 892262881 15179 (None) 128.122.140.58 Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-04-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Tucker said << package body Abstraction is procedure Op1(...) is begin -- do something interesting end Op1; Counter : Integer := 0; -- "static" variable used by Bump_Counter procedure Bump_Counter(Next : out Integer) is begin Counter := Counter + 1; Next := Counter; end Bump_Counter; end Abstraction; >> You really don't need the relaxed rules of Ada 95 here, and indeed they are not really sufficient in this case (what if there were another routine after Bump_Counter, it would be able to see Counter, which is wrong). Instead you can just introduce a nested package: package body Abstraction is procedure Op1(...) is begin -- do something interesting end Op1; package body Encapsulate is Counter : Integer := 0; -- "static" variable used by Bump_Counter procedure Bump_Counter(Next : out Integer) is begin Counter := Counter + 1; Next := Counter; end Bump_Counter; end Encapsulate; end Abstraction; The corresponding package spec might have package Abstraction is procedure Op1(...); package Encapsulate is procedure Bump_Counter (Next : out Integer); end Encapsulate; procedure Bump_Counter (Next : out Integer) renames Encapsulate.Bump_Counter; end Abstraction; and this can of course be done in Ada 83, so the reference to this as a crippling problem seems overblown!