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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,9862c21fee63f95c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-10 01:34:41 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-pas-nf2!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: And838N@netscape.net Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Visibility and Elaboration Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 04:33:12 -0400 Organization: ENST, France Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1055234043 10622 137.194.161.2 (10 Jun 2003 08:34:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 08:34:03 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Return-Path: X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail to news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38888 Date: 2003-06-10T04:33:12-04:00 > David C. Hoos, Sr. wrote: >The compiler did _not_ complain when the unneeded "with" of >Ada.Text_IO was removed. Huh, that's interesting. �adagcc says that "put" is undefined and that the is possibly a missing with of Text_IO, therefore, for me, it is a necessity. �Let's move on. In the b~newelaborations.adb file I don't see any mention of an 'Elab_ for the elo package. �Regardless, I'm not real concerned about that aspect. �My concern is learning what happens differently in an elaboration verses what happens by using the "new" reserved word. �If I define a package such as elo outside the newelaboration procedure and "with" and "use" it then it is only elaborated once. I can still create new elos by using the "new" reserved word. �My question is how is this different? �The elo "objects" (I don't even know if they are objects) that were created using "new" should all have their own copy of the data (value) and the printvalue procedure (by some means) like the elaborations would have in the newelabroations doelaborations subprocedure. The way it is now, each time the doelaborations subprocedure is called the elo package is elaborated (before the actual call) and, like using "new", each one has their own copy of value and printvalue. �Is the only difference their scope and lifetime? � Andrew __________________________________________________________________ McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network. Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397 Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge. Download Now! http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455