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,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
From: mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney)
Subject: Re: Interface/Implementation (was Re: Design by Contract)
Date: 1997/09/10
Message-ID: <mheaney-ya023680001009970904100001@news.ni.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 271376217
References: <EG9y0E.C65@syd.csa.com.au> <EGAqKI.GsE.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
Organization: Estormza Software
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 1997-09-10T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



In article <EGAqKI.GsE.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>,
stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) wrote:


>This may be a practice-versus-capability issue again.  There is
>nothing precluding the use of separate declarations, even if the
>subprogram is local to the body.  One typical coding style adopted
>for Ada package bodies is:
>
>     <declarations of local subprograms>
>
>     <bodies for visible subprograms>
>
>     <bodies for local subprograms>
>
>Given this style, the bodies can be ordered in any way that is convenient.

Funny, I didn't understand Don's comment, because I thought that everyone
already did this.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Heaney
Software Development Consultant
<mailto:matthew_heaney@acm.org>
(818) 985-1271