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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!steinmetz!ge-dab!peora!petsd!cjh
From: cjh@petsd.UUCP (Chris Henrich)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Generics: 'Retraction' and an example
Summary: C3Ada handles the example
Message-ID: <1327@petsd.UUCP>
Date: 7 Sep 88 21:50:55 GMT
References: <8809061331.AA11160@mitre-bedford.ARPA>
Reply-To: cjh@petsd.UUCP (Chris Henrich)
Organization: Perkin-Elmer DSG, Tinton Falls, N.J.
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <8809061331.AA11160@mitre-bedford.ARPA> emery@MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA.UUCP writes:
>
>However, here's an example of something that I can do on Verdix that
>DEC and (some) other compilers do not like.  I believe this is legal Ada.  
I believe so too, and Concurrent Computer Corporation's compiler
seems to handle it correctly.
>
>package A is
>  
>  generic
>  package B is
>    function foo return integer;
>  end B;
>  
>end A;
>
>package body A is
>  x : integer;
>  
>  package body B is separate;
>  
>  package my_b is new b;
>  -- some compilers don't like this instantiation
>  -- DEC (VMS 1.3-24) and Tartan (Sun 2.0) are two that don't 
>  -- Verdix (Sun 5.5j) compiles this just fine.
>begin
>  x := my_b.foo;
>end A;
>
>separate (A)
>package body B is
>  function foo return integer is
>  begin
>    return 42;  -- life, the universe, and everything...
>  end foo;
>end B;
>				
>				dave emery
>				emery@mitre-bedford.arpa
Regards,
Chris

UUCP:       ...!rutgers!petsd!cjh            
Concurrent Computer Corporation is a Perkin-Elmer company.