Re: Forward Declaration in Pkg Body

<fitzjarrell_at_cox.net>
> klabu wrote:
>> <fitzjarrell_at_cox.net>
>> > Normally that would be done in the package specification, not the
>> > package body.
>> >
>> > And, no, there isn't anything 'wrong' with that practice.
>>
>>
>> I said ---- "local modules" --- i.e. the ones you do NOT want to expose
>> externally.
>> If your statement is still the same regardless,
>> then I do not agree, you don't just put every bit of code in the spec.
>> That is why "Forward Declaration" is there IMO.
>
> Where did I say in my response it was an *absolute* to put them ONLY in
> the package specification? You assume too much from what is written.
> "Normally" means, to my mind, the *usual* course of action in declaring
> such modules. Certainly there will be exceptions, and I made *no*
> statement to indicate otherwise.
>
>
> David Fitzjarrell
>

where did I say you said "it was an *absolute* to put them ONLY...." ? ;)

alright, let me re-state the original q:

Is there anything wrong with FORWARD-DECALRING ALL LOCAL modules in package body --- the ones I do NOT and (logically should NOT) want to expose in spec --- whether I really "need" to or not
so that I don't have to worry about their sequence in the package body ?

10gR2 Received on Fri Dec 15 2006 - 11:39:44 CST