"J-P. Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr> wrote in message 
news:p6m2e3$4bj$1@dont-email.me...
> Le 22/02/2018 à 09:33, Dmitry A. Kazakov a écrit :
>> I am keeping on avoiding "limited with", and the only time I lowered my
>> guard, it bite me! (:-))
> Yes, limited with is a bit of a hack, but remember that the ARG had to
> solve the issue of mutual dependency, and 6 other non-working solutions
> were considered before this one, not very clean, but that worked!

At least two of those other solutions would have worked, but they were 
considered even more of a hack. (I know the "external incomplete type" 
solution would have worked, because it's basically the same semantically, 
but there were concerns about having (weak) dependencies not exposed in the 
context clause. We fixed that with a context clause declaration, but then it 
really looked like a hack.)

                            Randy.