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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,555956c1cdd22308 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Mats Weber Subject: Re: Help - Constructors - ASAP. Date: 1998/08/04 Message-ID: <35C750F2.483B5A51@elca-matrix.ch>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 377895537 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <6p75qi$rcj@news.latnet.lv> <6pi4jq$j73$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35C5C534.D773CAA2@elca-matrix.ch> <35C5FCD9.2EE39FE4@elca-matrix.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: ELCA Matrix SA Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-08-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Matthew Heaney wrote: > Ah, but then another rule of thumb applies. Since the generic operation > isn't primitive anyway, you just make the tagged parameters class-wide. > Then it will work for your derived types too. Weren't we talking about non-tagged types ? Anyway, I don't think it's a good idea to make them class-wide just for that reason. Most often, the generic operation needs to be adapted when inheriting, so making the tagged type parameters class-wide is error-prone.