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,b8b8a54001adc4d2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!newsfeed.stueberl.de!feed.news.tiscali.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!carbon.eu.sun.com!btnet-feed5!btnet!news.btopenworld.com!not-for-mail
From: Martin Dowie <martin.dowie@btopenworld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Possible Ada deficiency?
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:41:18 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: BT Openworld
Message-ID: <crrtse$h6f$1@hercules.btinternet.com>
References: <1104516913.718856.94090@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
   <wccy8f4orfp.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <1105290947.422412.195950@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host81-152-56-142.range81-152.btcentralplus.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: hercules.btinternet.com 1105296078 17615 81.152.56.142 (9 Jan 2005
 18:41:18 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news-complaints@lists.btinternet.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:41:18 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <1105290947.422412.195950@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0RC1 (Windows/20041201)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7586
Date: 2005-01-09T18:41:18+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

danmcleran@hotmail.com wrote:
> With the addition of this construct, a package writer can choose what
> areas should be directly visible to child packages, and what areas
> should not. This would force a child package to use the parent
> package's public interface when dealing with objects of type Some_Type,
> rather than having full visibility into Some_Type's internal
> representation.

I'm not sure but isn't this going to lead to some potentially horrible 
situations, e.g. the 'private' part needs to embed a 'concealed' part 
within a type? How would you treat mutual dependencies between such 
types? Etc.

Cheers

-- Martin