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 10.204.141.4 with SMTP id k4mr537966bku.6.1335402391938;
        Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 h15ni165979bkw.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.internetdienste.de!noris.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!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 18:06:22 -0700
Organization: TornevallNET - http://news.tornevall.net
Message-ID: <jna760$cou$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5>
 <4f97bf40$0$6559$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <jn9f2o$g98$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <op.wdb9nm14ule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <jn9pjs$b8a$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <op.wdcbcfmcule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <jn9u73$mao$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <op.wdckmcyzule2fv@douda-yannick>
NNTP-Posting-Host: abfbb8474f353143b456a8e1a73886dd
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: e176bd4f7ca662c0611ed13da8a12cb5
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.wdckmcyzule2fv@douda-yannick>
X-UserIDNumber: 1738
X-Validate-Post: 
 http://news.tornevall.net/validate.php?trace=e176bd4f7ca662c0611ed13da8a12cb5
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: 2012-04-25T18:06:22-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 04/25/2012 05:50 PM, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote:
>
> Child package are not less readable, as all kind of modularity ease
> understanding, be it either child packages or nested packages. However, there is
> another less mentioned — while as much important — requirement of Ada, which is
> project and source management (thus the “is separate”). And child packages ease
> project management, for the reason I gave. Also, child packages allows for
> optional additions or various alternatives for a given addition, by means of
> project configuration: just remove the path to a set of child packages source
> and specs, to remove it from a project. With nested package, you have to modify
> the package each time.

I'm not suggesting getting rid of child packages; I'm suggesting not allowing 
them to *extend* their ancestors (and all other forms of programming by extension).

> Getting ride of child packages (as back to Ada 83), would promise nightmares for
> many ones.

As I said, I'm not suggesting getting rid of child packages. But it's important 
to remember that Ada 83 is a good language. It was a very good language for its 
time; compared to most languages in use today, it's still a good language.

-- 
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