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: 103376,58f5085c2edafcfe
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Design - cyclic dependencies
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:28:50 -0400
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc4pgear19.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <1193401560.389194.282030@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1193408930 27197 192.74.137.71 (26 Oct 2007 14:28:50
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:28:50 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+Vim3PfXT9hz3ClmnABXTlUy2nU=
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:2582
Date: 2007-10-26T10:28:50-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com> writes:

> Being legal does not imply being good and therefore I ask: do you
> consider this kind of design-level cyclic dependency to be acceptable?

There are certainly cases where such cycles are the best design.
But don't do it unless you have to, because cycles make the
packages involves more tightly coupled.  And try to keep the
cycles short.

There are even cases where spec-to-spec cycles are best,
which is why the "limited with" feature was added to Ada.

- Bob