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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!gandalf.srv.welterde.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: some trivial questions?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 18:51:02 -0600
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <oulbpm$p2t$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: <6a5368c5-f015-4dcb-9291-e77b40fa1bf1@googlegroups.com>
 <ff607ea1-9d64-441b-b5e6-1a4377a5a199@googlegroups.com>
 <oteku0$ek3$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Injection-Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:51:02 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="25693"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: feeder.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:48947
Date: 2017-11-16T18:51:02-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message 
news:oteku0$ek3$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> On 02/11/2017 02:19, tclwarrior@gmail.com wrote:
>> i think every time you insert a use, you will most definitely add a with> 
>> it just look to me, that this is a bit redundant to add two
>> line, when one should do ... the compiler can should easily assume
>> that
> Yes. There is no reason why "with" could not be deduced from "use".

True, but many Ada users find it valuable to have a list of dependencies at 
the top of each unit. The list of explicit "with"s provides this. When we 
were working on what eventually became "limited with", several good ideas 
were rejected (more by the Ada community than the ARG) because the 
dependency was not listed at the top of the unit.

As far as "use" clauses code, package use clauses are always a maintenance 
hazard as they make non-overloadable things visible. I suggest avoiding them 
as much as possible on that basis. "use type" and "use all type" avoid that 
problem and thus are much less likely to cause maintenance problems in the 
future. (And prefix notation, which avoids the need for any sort of "use" 
completely, is even better.)

                                       Randy.