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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,9983e856ed268154
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.180.24.202 with SMTP id w10mr826929wif.0.1345237722958;
        Fri, 17 Aug 2012 14:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 n2ni181736744win.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!85.12.40.138.MISMATCH!xlned.com!feeder5.xlned.com!border-2.ams.xsnews.nl!border4.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feed.xsnews.nl!border-1.ams.xsnews.nl!plix.pl!newsfeed2.plix.pl!217.153.128.51.MISMATCH!nf1.ipartners.pl!ipartners.pl!news.nask.pl!news.nask.org.pl!news.unit0.net!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Should Inline be private in the private part of a package spec?
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 18:24:54 +0200
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <sgy28ka2rw0a.119txios2lu0g$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <501bd285$0$6564$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <jvnchp$r5c$1@munin.nbi.dk> <wccr4rkqed5.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <op.wiml9rw3ka8ora@aspire.local>
 <502005b6$0$9510$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <op.wim0pbprka8ora@aspire.local>
 <50203ca2$0$9512$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <502040c0$0$9510$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <k01amo$jio$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <50677fa2-7f82-4ccc-8c56-161bf67fefe1@googlegroups.com>
 <k04a26$doi$1@munin.nbi.dk> <op.wius1gdbka8ora@aspire.local>
 <k0bubm$loe$1@munin.nbi.dk> <op.wi0fliuoka8ora@aspire.local>
 <44bb5c96-a158-41c1-8e7d-ae83b2c0aca1@googlegroups.com>
 <1mchat48i3fos.1ksbz02nuzf5f$.dlg@40tude.net> <k0ei0u$214$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <rznvpohy5adk$.1of2k7nklsaam.dlg@40tude.net>
 <502b832f$0$6579$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <vqx5pu5yd4m7.jlystys02zcx$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <502bc4df$0$6574$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9A8bJrx4NhDLcSmbrb6AdA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-08-15T18:24:54+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:49:01 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> On 15.08.12 13:55, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:08:37 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>> 
>>> I would say that a network connecting the electrical devices
>>> of a car does not counts as heterogeneous.
>> 
>> How are the ECU, navigation system, ABS, windshield wiper homogenous?
> 
> They are homogeneous in that the 4 suppliers agree to be supplying
> for the same 1 system, under the "umbrella-notion" of car
> electronics.

I see, not to forget that the gravitational constant is same too. That
evidently makes it homogenous...

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de