Re: Generics and Child Packages

[Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>]

sbelmont700@gmail.com writes:

> Though I still don't buy the "children of a generic are a generic"
> explanation.  Semantically there is no difference between a nested
> package and a child package, ...

That ought to be the case, but it's not.  There are lots of
other cases, besides this child-generic thing.  Why is this
legal:

with Ada.Containers.Vectors; use Ada;
package P is
   type T is private;
private
   type T is (Red);
end P;

package P.Q is
   package T_Vectors is new Containers.Vectors
     (Index_Type => Positive, Element_Type => T);
end P.Q;

but this is illegal:

with Ada.Containers.Vectors; use Ada;
package P is
   type T is private;

   package Q is
      package T_Vectors is new Containers.Vectors
        (Index_Type => Positive, Element_Type => T);
   end Q;
private
   type T is (Red);
end P;

For that matter, why should the following be illegal:

package P is
   with Something;
   package Q is
   end Q;
end P;

- Bob