From: steve@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Steven Holtsberg)
Subject: Another question about types and subypes
Date: Thu, 14-Aug-86 18:12:31 EDT [thread overview]
Date: Thu Aug 14 18:12:31 1986
Message-ID: <2956@sdcrdcf.UUCP> (raw)
On page 3-15, section 3.5.4, the ARM says:
A type declaration of the form:
type T is range L .. R;
is, by definition equivalent to the following declarations:
type <integer_type> is new predefined_integer_type;
subtype T is <integer_type> range <integer_type>(L) .. <integer_type>(R);
It then goes on to refer to T as a _type_ :
"The elaboration of the declaration of an integer _type_ ...".
However, the "equivalent" pair of declarations given does
_not_ declare a new type named T, is declares an anonymous
type (integer_type) and a _subtype_ T.
Are they lying, or are they just careless?
next reply other threads:[~1986-08-14 22:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1986-08-14 22:12 Steven Holtsberg [this message]
1986-08-14 22:23 ` Another question about types and subypes Mark Biggar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox