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=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_STARTS_WITH_NUMS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.36.7.79 with SMTP id f76mr5313119itf.52.1516819012633; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 10:36:52 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.157.1.193 with SMTP id e59mr723183ote.13.1516819012455; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 10:36:52 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!paganini.bofh.team!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!g80no179416itg.0!news-out.google.com!b73ni9685ita.0!nntp.google.com!w142no179568ita.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 10:36:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.242.255.128; posting-account=rhqvKAoAAABpikMmPHJSZh4400BboHwT NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.242.255.128 References: <3d796e5f-015e-469c-bbcb-edc3303793ab@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <21d0a0b8-8c66-42fb-9d4a-dc9dbbc33521@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: no + or - defined for fixed point types in Standard, why ? From: Mehdi Saada <00120260a@gmail.com> Injection-Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 18:36:52 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50113 Date: 2018-01-24T10:36:51-08:00 List-Id: > It is hard to correctly override the predefined operators where they are = directly visible. [...] To (re-)define * or / you will need to write a bo= dy that uses Unchecked_Conversion of the proper integer type, or converts b= oth operands to some floating point type. My gosh, did I stumbled against a language's corner again ? I think I'll st= ick with the conversion method... But can you elaborate on "directly visibl= e" ? I don't understand. To me either it's visible, either it's not...=20 Even with the conversion method, the warning about overridding won't go awa= y. Eventhough there's no explicit call on Standard anymore. > You are trying to do something wonky, and the compiler is telling you tha= t. I could tell before trying ;-)