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: 103376,4103f02f9e6c4df2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-12 16:17:57 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!howland.erols.net!usc.edu!ragnarok.cts.com!thoth.cts.com!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <kst@cts.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada 0y wish list: "with private"
Date: 12 Feb 2001 16:10:44 -0800
Organization: CTSnet Internet Services
Sender: kst@king.cts.com
Message-ID: <yecae7rigsb.fsf@king.cts.com>
References: <968p1e$8m7$1@s1.read.news.oleane.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: king.cts.com
X-Trace: thoth.cts.com 982023049 61634 209.68.192.180 (13 Feb 2001 00:10:49
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@cts.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:10:49 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.3
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5203
Date: 2001-02-12T16:10:44-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Thierry Lelegard" <thierry.lelegard@canal-plus.fr> writes:
> Recently, several wishlist items for Ada 0y were posted in c.l.a.
> Like many old Ada users, I have a couple of them. I would like to
> propose one for discussion: a "with private" extension.
> 
> The idea is to specify in a context clause of a unit spec that an
> external unit can be used only in the private part.
> 
> Example:
> 
> with A;
> with private B;
> package C is
>    X : A.TA;
> private
>    Y : B.TB; -- legal only in private part
> end C;

What about this syntax:

with A;
package C is
   X : A.TA;
private
   with B;
   Y : B.TB;
end C;

The advantage is that it puts the context clause within the private
part, which is what it applies to.

One possible drawback: Currently, the compiler sees all the context
clauses before the beginning of the package; with this syntax, it will
have to process the public declarations of C before seeing the "with
B;".  Some implementations would have more difficulty with this than
others; would it be an unreasonable burden for any of them?

(It also looks a bit odd to put a context clause into a sequence of
declarations.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
MAKE MONEY FAST!!  DON'T FEED IT!!