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!news1.google.com!newsread.com!news-xfer.newsread.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Possible Ada deficiency? Date: 09 Jan 2005 12:46:15 -0500 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Message-ID: References: <1104516913.718856.94090@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1104544963.930877.75170@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1104595073.731663.180100@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1105291405.372539.233570@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01-e.theworld.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1105292775 18860 69.38.147.31 (9 Jan 2005 17:46:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 17:46:15 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7584 Date: 2005-01-09T12:46:15-05:00 List-Id: danmcleran@hotmail.com writes: > >By the way, is the original poster worried that subunits can see all > >kinds of hidden stuff in the parent body? That case seems less > >worrisome, because the parent mentions the names of all subunits. > >The language could allow the same thing for children (but it shouldn't > >*require* it). > > I'm not sure what you mean by this. My only point is that there is no > way to hide internal representation details from child packages. I mean: both child packages and subunits are separately compiled hunks of code (separate from the parent). Child packages have visibility on the parent's private part, which you don't like. Subunits have visibility on the parent's body. Is that equally bothersome? I say, no, because the parent package lists the names of all the subunits; you can't add new ones without modifying the parent. And the parent can of course disallow subunits altogether. So my suggested "fix" is to make child units more like subunits in this one respect -- allow (not require) the parent to name the children, or forbid children altogether. If you answer "yes" to my question (please explain why), then you won't like my suggested fix. - Bob