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,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d927b7ea9b65580a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-11-09 06:58:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!fr.usenet-edu.net!usenet-edu.net!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: sk Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Style: always declare subrountines? Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 08:53:20 -0600 Organization: ENST, France Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: References: <3dccc023$0$304$bed64819@news.gradwell.net> <3dcd1752$0$305$bed64819@news.gradwell.net> Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1036853882 92136 137.194.161.2 (9 Nov 2002 14:58:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 14:58:02 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19-4.3mdk i686) X-Accept-Language: en Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:30646 Date: 2002-11-09T08:53:20-06:00 Hi, porton@ex-code.com (Victor Porton) > You misunderstood. I'm about the case when one has forgotten > to write the definition of the "public procedure", but > written in the body a "private procedure" with the same > specification. I do misunderstand and I am having a difficult time imagining how the situation would occurr ... Either you want to make a private procedure public ? ... then simply put the spec in the package spec and obviously not what you are talking about. Or you want two subroutines, possibly unrelated, one public and one private, to operate on the same data types etc, with the same name ? ... I would tend to do a rethink at this stage and change data abstractions and modeling. -- ------------------------------------- -- Merge vertically for real address ------------------------------------- s n p @ t . o k i e k c c m -------------------------------------