Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 15 Apr 1998 13:04:57 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
At 08:40 AM 4/15/98 +0200, Jean-Pierre Rosen wrote:
>Which raises an interesting question: how do you count:
>with A.B.C;
>
>as you know, it is equivalent to:
>with A, A.B, A.B.C;
>
>from the point of view of visibility rules, it is clearly equivalent to
three >withs. OTOH, it is likely that the programmer uses only the ultimate
child.
Actually, you need to count them all, but only once. I find myself in
Ada 95 appreciating the fact that if I have (for example) a child package
containing constructors, I have some with clauses that say:
with Some_Abstraction;
and others say:
with Some_Abstraction.Creation;
but often the spec of a package has the first, and the body the second.
Robert I. Eachus
with Standard_Disclaimer;
use Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...
|
|
|