Re: Re-exporting primitive operations of a private type (like "-", and 'min)

[Jean-Pierre Rosen <rosen@adalog.fr>]

Niklas Holsti a �crit :
> With the new feature, the "implementation defined" pseudocode could be 
> replaced by real code:
> 
>       type Storage_Offset is private range <>;  -- Not Ada.
>       type Storage_Element is private mod <>;   -- Not Ada.
> 
> The full type declarations would be in the private part of the package, 
> as usual.
> 
> In such declarations, the "private" keyword is perhaps unnecessary, 
> since the presence of the box "<>" shows that the declared type is 
> partly hidden.
> 
> Does this idea appeal to anyone?
> 
I fail to see the benefit. The only thing that would be "hidden" with 
such a declaration is the actual value of the bounds. But you could get 
them with 'First and 'Last. So, there would be no benefit in pretending 
that they are "private".

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------
            J-P. Rosen (rosen@adalog.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://www.adalog.fr