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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,33ce43bfeafb2681
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!uucp.gnuu.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Concatenate enumeration
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <be502fa4-37e4-47c0-a0ba-1618eee9a35e@1g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
 <heemov$1se$1@news.tornevall.net> <wcctywksu8t.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <hekcgj$d7e$1@munin.nbi.dk> <eayrakxg11ot$.u7aknwy6xxh6.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4b0e4ee7$0$6562$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:03:59 +0100
Message-ID: <1fwpl81qnk0j6.4n19k2guxtfj$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Nov 2009 11:03:59 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: b718b517.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=NiWQBUKT4@eEB;5>eE0T7m4IUK<Cl32<a4Fo<]lROoRa8kF<OcfhCOkWOemhf?UNZn[6LHn;2LCVn7enW;^6ZC`dIXm65S@:3>oF;]5?m>[3En
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8240
Date: 2009-11-26T11:03:59+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:48:24 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov schrieb:
> 
>> Not very useful, but in other cases reflection could be very interesting.
>> For example, in generics:
>> 
>>    generic
>>       type T is array; -- Only this
>>    package ... is
>>       -- The [first] array index type would be T'Index (1)
>>       -- The array element type would be T'Element etc
>> 
> 
> I'm probably dense.  Is there a difference to what we have
> now other than the unknown number of indexes of the array
> type above?
> 
>    generic
>        type T_Index is (<>);
>        type T_Element is private;
>        type T is array (T_Index range <>) of T_Element;
>    package ... is

The difference is in the number of formal parameters.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de