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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!newsfeed.xs3.de!io.xs3.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Visibility of Indexing aspects
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:32:02 -0500
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <pj66jj$cse$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
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>
 <c74ed72d-bd55-4864-b569-ed4eae88941c@googlegroups.com>
 <dbc94806-dbf9-408d-b8ad-3a159eb85b24@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 03:32:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="13198"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53951
Date: 2018-07-23T22:32:02-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Jere" <jhb.chat@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:dbc94806-dbf9-408d-b8ad-3a159eb85b24@googlegroups.com...
...
> Question:  Section 13.1.3 (1/3) says "The declaration with
> the aspect_specification is termed the associated declaration."
> In the case of the bugged example I gave, the aspect_specification
> was with the full view of the type.  Is that then considered the
> declaration of the type, or is just the partial view in the public
> section considered the declaration?  I am assuming the full view
> is still considered the declaration.

They're two separate-but-related declarations. You can tell if something is 
a declaration by looking at the name of its syntax. If the syntax includes 
"_declaration",  then it's a declaration. And since we have 
private_type_declaration and full_type_declaration, they're both 
declarations. (See RM 3.1 for the more formal definitions.)

There are implicit declarations as well, of course, but they don't have 
anything to do with this particular question.

                                         Randy.