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-Thread: a07f3367d7,da85d9aaf769b16a
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.flashnewsgroups.com-b7.4zTQh5tI3A!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Generic package parameters not externally visible : what's the
 rational ?
References: <d31a3f23-975d-4ae7-954a-82055b50f172@31g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>
 <wcciqe26w5q.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <hc7nfq$6o7$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <wccaazcxvgn.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <b6d32b60-333f-495d-b17a-7ab589690bbb@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
 <hca52n$kom$1@munin.nbi.dk>
From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 03:34:35 -0400
Message-ID: <ufx928xh0.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (windows-nt)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ge1Y3BnEumE4IuJKtumF2midD84=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@flashnewsgroups.com
Organization: FlashNewsgroups.com
X-Trace: e4a234ae94576e197caa727831
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8834
Date: 2009-10-29T03:34:35-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> writes:

> "Hibou57 (Yannick Duch�ne)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote in message 
> news:b6d32b60-333f-495d-b17a-7ab589690bbb@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>
> ...
>>But right a few minutes ago, I was thinking that is may be finally
>>better to be able to hide something there. Perhaps peoples who were
>>talking about protecting type privacy, were thinking about a formal
>>parameter used in the private part of the package only. When it is
>>(this may not always be so much strange as it seems, to give formals
>>parameters which are only used in private part), it is better to not
>>make these visible from the outside. Providing this is a good answer,
>>then the actual is so just the best, because it allow to show or hide
>>at the discretion of the author (the language does not impose anything
>>there, except it hides by default, and that's finally a good fact).
>
> By jove, I think he's got it! :-)
>
> The above reasoning makes sense, and it actually seems to reflect the 
> supposed rationale. It would be nice if a fuller example of this was 
> included somewhere. (I'd put it into the AARM if I had any idea of where it 
> should go.)

And we should add optional "private" keywords on all the formal
parameters, as we now have "private with" for context clauses.

Then non-private formal generic parameters could be visible, and
private ones not.

-- 
-- Stephe