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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9d0b383ee17c13af
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Samuel T. Harris" <sam_harris@hso.link.com>
Subject: Re: One type for all
Date: 1999/07/12
Message-ID: <378A6C37.D35F44AD@hso.link.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 500281861
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <3783E0D2.5D74243@boeing.com> <3786741C.E73F1124@hso.link.com>
 <Pine.A41.3.96-heb-2.07.990710013813.72936A-100000@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Raytheon Training Inc.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-07-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Ehud Lamm wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Samuel T. Harris wrote:
> 
> > Types in both Ada 83 and Ada 95 use name-equivalence instead
> > of structural-equivalence
> 
> Note that when you instantiate a generic a strucutural equivalence is
> required (according to the generic rules).
> 
> Ehud Lamm     mslamm@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il
> http://purl.oclc.org/NET/ehudlamm  <== My home on the web

This is true.
However, the original poster was refering to type and
object declarations and generics were not involved.

To be more precise, perhaps I should have said Ada uses
name-equivalence for type and object declarations.

-- 
Samuel T. Harris, Principal Engineer
Raytheon, Scientific and Technical Systems
"If you can make it, We can fake it!"