From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk  Mon Jun 23 11:17:20 2003
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h5N9HKJY045752
	for sc22wg5-domo; Mon, 23 Jun 2003 11:17:20 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk)
X-Authentication-Warning: ptah.dkuug.dk: majordom set sender to owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk using -f
Received: from inf.rl.ac.uk (nfs7.inf.rl.ac.uk [130.246.72.7])
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h5N9HDEc045747
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Mon, 23 Jun 2003 11:17:15 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk)
Received: from numerical.cc.rl.ac.uk (numerical [130.246.8.23])
	by inf.rl.ac.uk (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id h5N9FGD00269
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Mon, 23 Jun 2003 10:15:16 +0100 (BST)
Received: from rl.ac.uk (jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.202])
	by numerical.cc.rl.ac.uk (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA27821
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Mon, 23 Jun 2003 10:26:02 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <3EF6C6B6.2040801@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 10:21:58 +0100
From: John Reid <j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk>
Reply-To: j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk
Organization: Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: WG5 <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.2792) [Fwd: Modules TR] 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk
Precedence: bulk



-------- Original Message --------

To: WG5 <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.2792) [Fwd: Modules TR]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:27:58 -0700
From: Van Snyder <vsnyder@math.jpl.nasa.gov>


In response to

 >  >Essentially, it has the PRIVATE attribute, but this is not declared
 >  >explicitly.

Michael Ingrassia <michaeli@ranma.eng.sun.com> wrote:

 > When you put it that way ... it certainly makes it sound attractive to
 > require to give
 > it an explicit PRIVATE attribute.

PRIVATE affects USE association.  Nothing in a submodule is
directly accessible by USE association.  Therefore, there's no
point to putting PRIVATE on anything.  In a big complicated module,
requiring PRIVATE on everything declared in its scoping unit
would do nothing but earn the curses of the user community.

--
Van Snyder                    |  What fraction of Americans believe
Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov       |  Wrestling is real and NASA is fake?
Any alleged opinions are my own and have not been approved or disapproved
by JPL, CalTech, NASA, Sean O'Keefe, George Bush, the Pope, or anybody else.

