Re: Limited_Controlled, orthogonality and related issues

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Maciej Sobczak" <no.spam@no.spam.com> wrote in message
news:eoned5$663$1@cernne03.cern.ch...
...
> In conclusion, my decision to make T and S controlled appeared to not be
> orthogonal to the rest of the package.
>
> What are your thoughts about this?

It's dubious to have two abstractions in the same package. It's a nice
simplification compared to other languages, but it's usually better to have
fewer types in one package rather than more. If T and S were in different
packages, this problem wouldn't happen. Note that one of the packages could
be nested or a child, and that would still have the visibility on the
private part.

Something like:

package Root is
   type S is limited private;
...
end Root;

package Root.Child is
   type T is limited private;
   procedure Do_Something (A : T, B : S);
...
end Root.Child;

Usually, one or the other of the abstractions can be used alone, and that is
the one that belongs in the root.

                    Randy.