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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,4c019ad9cc913bbe X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-09-20 00:30:39 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!128.39.3.168!uninett.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: The Dreaded "Missing Subunits" Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 07:30:38 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1032507038 10821 129.241.83.82 (20 Sep 2002 07:30:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 07:30:38 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29204 Date: 2002-09-20T07:30:38+00:00 List-Id: On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:03:23 +0200 (MET DST), Grein, Christoph wrote: >> >> Besides don't you get the with-ing problem with .ada? >> > >> > Why? It worked with Ada 83, why shouldn't it with Ada 95. >> >> I don't know how the .ada works, but sometimes you have to with in the >> .adb and not the .ads to avoid circular dependance. But I guess you can >> put the withs after the spec and the compiler will recognice this? > > This is a misconception. It's no language concern how you store Ada units. Whether you store specs and bodies in one file or separately does not affect the > semantics. > > And you do not "with" .ads, .adb, or .ada _files_, you with Ada units. I didn't say you did if you see above. I am wondering what makes it different to with a package before the body of another package versus before the spec of another package. > > Having specs and bodies separate is ony a convention of some compiler vendors. So as I said you put the with after the package spec and it will be ok with the language (no circular dependance). Preben