From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: type and subtype
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:21:48 +0200
Date: 2005-07-26T10:21:45+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1ki8hvl7x4f4e.8uoxtbe6tewo.dlg@40tude.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 0L7Fe.3$Jf6.1@dfw-service2.ext.ray.com
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:41:48 -0700, Jeffrey Carter wrote:
> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>
>> I think that Ludovic's view is more consistent: checks are just a part of
>> the conversion which otherwise is an identity function, because *presently*
>> the representation is required to be same. But representation is an
>> implementation detail and thus cannot count. Moreover it is very desirable
>> to allow subtypes having different representations.
>
> because representations of subtypes are not required to be the same.
Depends on the definition, but I better agree with this. After all there
are other examples like String vs. String (1..20).
So, if representations aren't same then a conversion is required. Also
Ludovic was right.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-26 8:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-24 14:24 type and subtype Douglas Chong
2005-07-24 14:39 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2005-07-25 17:07 ` Martin Krischik
2005-07-24 16:20 ` Ludovic Brenta
2005-07-24 16:40 ` Jeffrey Carter
2005-07-25 8:23 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2005-07-25 15:41 ` Jeffrey Carter
2005-07-25 21:59 ` Ludovic Brenta
2005-07-26 8:21 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
2005-07-25 17:02 ` Martin Krischik
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox