Talk:Ada Programming/Packages

Child packages
What tried to explain the author of the "child packages" section? I don't understand anything. ManuelGR 22:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, that section is not very clear, and should be rewritten. Other sections are merely stubs, and need to be expanded. --surueña 09:20, August 10, 2005 (UTC)


 * Started. I have tried to keep some of the info of the original child packages subsection. gb 00:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Standard with
What's wrong with this section? There's nothing in it!

Perhaps it would be a good idea to cover the actual useful functions of ada before moving on to other sections?


 * There is nothing wrong with that section, just nobody has written it yet. You're right, for the good of the wikibook it would be better to cover the basic features of Ada, but every contributor volunteers with what he/she finds more interesting. If you want to write the with section you are, of course, welcome. ManuelGR 20:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The "With Type" Section
I'm not sure about the heading (the "with type" proposal has been abandoned in favor of "limited with"); the final example demonstrates "use type". Thoughts? gb 18:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I changed the heading to "Making operators visible" because this is what this section is about. CG, 4 May 2007

Private packages
This page presents private packages all wrong. The syntax for a private package is:

"private package P is..."

and this wiki page actually presents a private /type/ within a public package incorrectly as a "private package".

--Justin Gombos (April 2008)


 * The terminology was a bit confusing between "private part" and "private package". I hope it is solved now. ManuelGR (talk) 19:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Packages and compilation units
The discussion starts off on the wrong foot by talking about separate compilation. This confuses packages with compilation units, and the article never recovers.

It's probably true that maybe the majority of packages are separate compilation units, and that the majority of separate compilation units are packages. However, it's also true that there are many packages that aren't compilation units, and many compilation units that aren't packages. The ability to separately compile a package is a language feature that is used in almost every Ada program, but packages are not at all the same thing as separate compilation. DougP (talk) 22:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The paragraph on separate compilation:


 * A note to C/C++ users: Yes, you can use the preprocessor to emulate separate compilation — but it is only an emulation and the smallest mistake leads to very hard to find bugs. It is telling that all C/C++ successor languages including D have turned away from the independent compilation and the use of the preprocessor.

This is basically FUD --- it's unnecessary vilification of C and C++. It's not even true; C and C++ do separate compilation in exactly the same way that Ada does. It doesn't belong here. DavidGiven (discuss • contribs) 22:01, 13 August 2014 (UTC)