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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:3dd:: with SMTP id e90-v6mr959329ioi.85.1532103071904;
        Fri, 20 Jul 2018 09:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:aca:de07:: with SMTP id v7-v6mr167703oig.5.1532103071691;
 Fri, 20 Jul 2018 09:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!g2-v6no1820933itf.0!news-out.google.com!l67-v6ni3278itl.0!nntp.google.com!g2-v6no1820930itf.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 09:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <9b6b6f10-5956-4a19-83f5-c1c015c62602@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=2003:c7:83f8:ebdc:a8aa:2fa2:d283:99da;
 posting-account=rmHyLAoAAADSQmMWJF0a_815Fdd96RDf
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2003:c7:83f8:ebdc:a8aa:2fa2:d283:99da
References: <40d568da-4715-42de-8e28-98da39a5c974@googlegroups.com>
 <34f499f7-020f-4dcc-adad-0ab1113386d1@googlegroups.com>
 <b1e463c1-b715-49d4-8649-506b1a2bc265@googlegroups.com>
 <dbc745d2-ec83-457b-b6d9-4bbc7d824126@googlegroups.com>
 <9d69e7b5-6b2d-4607-9f7b-affa78c41620@googlegroups.com>
 <41c711cb-0300-4a41-93d3-e69297ae1945@googlegroups.com>
 <42de4aa3-9e7c-44b8-aa84-712cc7ce03c6@googlegroups.com>
 <9b6b6f10-5956-4a19-83f5-c1c015c62602@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c74ed72d-bd55-4864-b569-ed4eae88941c@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Visibility of Indexing aspects
From: AdaMagica <christ-usch.grein@t-online.de>
Injection-Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 16:11:11 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53919
Date: 2018-07-20T09:11:11-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Am Freitag, 20. Juli 2018 14:08:11 UTC+2 schrieb Jere:
> I was under the impression that scope and visibility were two different
> things.  If I understand you correctly, it sounds like you are saying
> that
> 
> package Things is
>    --One scope
> private
>    --another scope
> end Things;
> 
> I was under the impression that it was more like:
> 
> package Things is
>    --One scope
> private
>    --same scope but different visibility
> end Things;

The scope of every declaration start with the place of the declaration, so in a package or any declarative region, there are many scopes, some of which are visible, others not.

> Also how does this reconcile with:
> 
> 8.3 (23.1/3):
> An attribute_definition_clause or an aspect_specification is
> visible everywhere within its scope.
> 
> That section makes it sound like aspects created in the private
> section are indeed visible in the public section.

Why do you think so?  

> Couple that with the section you mentioned:
> 
> 8.2(10.1/3) The scope of an aspect_specification is identical to 
> the scope of the associated declaration.

"associated" means the declaration (syntax) in which it appears. This is here in the private part in the full declaration, so it's *not* visible in the public part.

BTW: You should definitely report this severe bug to AdaCore.