Re: Disallowing Pre-Defined Operations

["Marin D. Condic" <mcondic-nospam@quadruscorp.com>]

dale wrote:
> A pragma would not do it, as you would have to deal with generics.
> (e.g. the semantics of a multiply operation in a generic would have
> to be modified not to raise an exception, but to cap the result).
> 
O.K. Point taken. I'm not a compiler writer so I'm glad someone else
does that job. ;-)

I don't like the notion of creating another reserved word if it can be
avoided. Obviously, the less intrusive my pet feature is, the more
likely it would be to end up in someone's compiler as an option. I could
imagine it being provided as a generic package, but my fear there is
that without some sort of "special treatment" by the compiler, the code
would be too slow to be useful in a real time system. Any suggestions?

MDC
-- 
=============================================================
Marin David Condic   - Quadrus Corporation -   1.800.555.3393
1015-116 Atlantic Boulevard, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
http://www.quadruscorp.com/
m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m

***PLEASE REMOVE THE "-NOSPAM" PART OF MY RETURN ADDRESS***

Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"I'd trade it all for just a little more"
    --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
=============================================================