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,d60e0492375aa57a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-07-31 06:33:33 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!lnsnews.lns.cornell.edu!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!66.250.146.10.MISMATCH!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!news
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: Visibility of private packages??
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Message-ID: <wcc3cu0hvne.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 13:30:45 GMT
References: <DtD19.636$C8.2739@nnrp1.uunet.ca>
 <3d47a99e.4548109@news.demon.co.uk>
 <dstanbro-8DD764.22063931072002@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27523
Date: 2002-07-31T13:30:45+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dale Stanbrough <dstanbro@bigpond.net.au> writes:

> Yes, that's correct. I think this is a case where the designers got it
> wrong. The current rules prevent "compilation coupling", that is any
> change to a private package will never result in the need to recompile
> a package outside of the hierachy.

Isn't the ARG considering relaxing this rule?

- Bob