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: 103376,baa6871d466e5af9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney) Subject: Re: AQ&S Guidance on pragma Elaborate_Body Date: 1997/04/24 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 237090369 References: <528878564wnr@diphi.demon.co.uk> <5jabeq$3ltk@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de> <5jfukp$lda@top.mitre.org> Organization: Estormza Software Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-04-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: >That is incorrect, you can certainly create cases of legitimate programs >where the use of Elaborate_Body will cause elaboration circularities. A >trivial example is two packages, each of whose bodies with's the others >spec, which is not that uncommon. It may be true that it "is not that uncommon," but mutual dependency of packages indicates that you have a pair of highly cohesive abstractions, and they should really be combined into a single package. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Matthew Heaney Software Development Consultant (818) 985-1271