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,dfb98535bcaeb3a6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Gautier Subject: Re: Controlled types in local generics? Date: 1999/12/30 Message-ID: <386BA7E4.6971F246@maths.unine.ch>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 566585827 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <386AFDA8.7C3110CC@telepath.com> <84g2uk$q8p$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: 30 Dec 1999 19:45:29 +0100, mac13-29.unine.ch MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-12-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: > Well perhaps, but really it would serve no purpose except to > confirm that the error message is correct. Perhaps you would > be more willing to believe it if you read it in the RM than > when GNAT tells you clearly :-) People need strong religious references. A message like: `This thing should be in that place' sound less serious than words full of wisdom like `Ada RM 3.18, verse 5 (2), alinea 3: the construct named such_name (7.15) is allowed in the bla bla bla part of the so_and_so declaration, only if the previously named bla bla bla part is placed in an upper level compared to the level of the structure that encloses the imbricated substructure, under the condition that, firstly, bla bla bla... ... ...' A bright demonstration is made in the `Life of Brian' (the scene with the prophets)... -- Gautier _____\\________________\_______\_________ http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/gsoft.htm