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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Received: by 10.68.236.170 with SMTP id uv10mr3854276pbc.4.1335388497722;
        Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:14:57 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 r9ni98199pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!volia.net!news2.volia.net!feed-A.news.volia.net!news.ecp.fr!nuzba.szn.dk!pnx.dk!news.tornevall.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jeffrey Carter <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:14:51 -0700
Organization: TornevallNET - http://news.tornevall.net
Message-ID: <jn9pjs$b8a$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5>
 <4f97bf40$0$6559$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <jn9f2o$g98$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <op.wdb9nm14ule2fv@douda-yannick>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 16392177b2c178c39cd3e336e59b4cb1
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: edb1bccecb474d483761d7086b659fe0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@tornevall.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686;
 rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1
X-Complaints-Language: Spoken language is english or swedish - NOT ITALIAN,
 FRENCH, GERMAN OR ANY OTHER LANGUAGE!
In-Reply-To: <op.wdb9nm14ule2fv@douda-yannick>
X-UserIDNumber: 1738
X-Validate-Post: 
 http://news.tornevall.net/validate.php?trace=edb1bccecb474d483761d7086b659fe0
X-Complaints-Italiano: Non abbiamo padronanza della lingua italiana - se
 mandate una email scrivete solo in Inglese, grazie
X-Posting-User: 0243687135df8c4b260dd4a9a93c79bd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-04-25T14:14:51-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 04/25/2012 01:53 PM, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote:
>
> You mean visibility of the ancestor's private part to the child package, is that
> it?

I mean all visibility of its ancestors. Package hierarchies should be for 
namespace control only.

>
> Imagine a simple case: a serialization of some private object type, with
> multiple codecs. I instinctively make each codecs, a child package of the
> package defining the serialized type, so that they can build an instance of
> type. Or else, you would have to expose to the big world, methods intended for
> serialization only, and serialization is often related to the internal
> representation of the serialized item (although not required). Can't give an
> easy example, but I also believe this would make some bindings more difficult.

Imagine a simple solution: a collection of private packages that implement the 
type and its operations, and a public package that makes public only those 
things that should be public.

Another thing I'd like to see removed: anonymous types.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Ada has made you lazy and careless. You can write programs in C that
are just as safe by the simple application of super-human diligence."
E. Robert Tisdale
72