Re: Redefined "=" = generic disaster?

[Jeff Carter <jrcarter@acm.org>]

Vincent Marciante wrote:
> Ugh!  So _are_ you saying that the Ada 83 code was defective wrt.
Ada
> 83?

In Ada 83, you could not redefine "=" for any type that could be used
to instantiate the generic, so if you wrote "=" in the generic, it meant
you wanted the predefined "=" for the type. This is still the case in
Ada if you do not explicitly import "=". If, in Ada 83, you wanted
some other behavior than the predefined "=", you still had to import it:

with function Equal (Left : T; Right : T) return Boolean;

The only real change in Ada is that now you can use the infix "=" to
represent user-defined equality, while in Ada 83 you had to use
something less intuitive. In either language, you get the predefined
"=" if you don't import something else, and have to import something
else if you don't want the predefined behavior.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Go and boil your bottom."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail