From: Wes Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com>
Subject: Re: When/Why can a compiler reject an operator but accept a name?
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 10:22:37 -0500
Date: 2002-07-08T10:22:37-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D29AE3D.6E256A9A@despammed.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: wccwus8mo93.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com
> > Compiler rejected it, saying:
> >
> > "<" has no definition that matches function (Left, Right : in Item)
> > return Boolean [RM_95 3.10.2(32)]
> >
> > I replaced "<" with Ord_Check (no other changes), and
> > the compiler accepted it.
>
> Sounds like a compiler bug, although I can't be sure without seeing all
> the code (e.g., you didn't show the code for Ord_Check).
Sorry for being a little vague. ">" was/is a somewhat
complicated function, and all I did to make it compile
was change the designator to "Ord_Check" in both the
declaration and all references.
I would normally compare the GNAT behavior, but
our admins had a bit of trouble replacing 3.14
with the integrated GCC 3.1 suite.
--
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-08 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-05 17:08 When/Why can a compiler reject an operator but accept a name? Wes Groleau
2002-07-06 23:26 ` Robert A Duff
2002-07-08 15:22 ` Wes Groleau [this message]
2002-07-08 12:17 ` Antonio Duran
2002-07-08 15:27 ` Wes Groleau
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox