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: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.131.71 with SMTP id ok7mr1619622pbb.8.1335729349616;
        Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:55:49 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 r9ni113148pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X?
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 15:55:49 -0400
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc397mwbwa.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5>
 <4f97bf40$0$6559$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <jn9f2o$g98$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <op.wdb9nm14ule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <jn9pjs$b8a$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <op.wdcbcfmcule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <jn9u73$mao$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <op.wdckmcyzule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <7039631.627.1335610937700.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbxz8>
 <wccehr6hcw6.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <10544679.2854.1335718755733.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbdx11>
 <wccfwbmwe9p.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <op.wdjktjwvule2fv@douda-yannick>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: pcls6.std.com 1335729349 21034 192.74.137.71 (29 Apr 2012 19:55:49
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:55:49 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bDOriZBA9pDJtxHRfxZsKXWdGiY=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-04-29T15:55:49-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> writes:

> Yes, and that's useful to define a set of preliminary types needed for the
> definition of a type, which is to be defined in P. Then, I like to do it
> all in Q, avoiding overlong and bloated name which would inevitably be
> there
> if ever another types follow some similar pattern in P. Unfortunately, if
> you do this, you cannot give Q any child packages, and if you make Q a
> child package, it cannot anymore access stuff already defined in p.

Exactly.

It would be nice if a parent spec could 'with' it's children.
That feature can't be added to Ada without major surgery.

We do allow it for 'limited with', but that's rather restrictive.

- Bob