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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3423d40a9e59c457 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-08-20 13:50:45 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc54.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3F43DF23.50209@attbi.com> From: "Robert I. Eachus" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is this legal? (Language lawyer question) References: <1518883.yLCxvbNBJf@linux1.krischik.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.34.139.183 X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-Trace: rwcrnsc54 1061412645 24.34.139.183 (Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:50:45 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:50:45 GMT Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:50:45 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:41745 Date: 2003-08-20T20:50:45+00:00 List-Id: Martin Krischik wrote: > Adam Beneschan wrote: > > >>I can't see how this wouldn't be ambiguous. Although ZZZ.all and Elem >>both have type Item'Class, it appears to me that there are two "=" >>functions visible at that point: >> >> function "=" (L, R : Item) return Boolean; >> function "=" (L, R : Item'Class) return Boolean; >> >>where the first one is the predefined operator of the generic formal >>type Item (see RM95 12.5(8)), and the second one is the generic formal >>function declared above. Applying 8.6(22-23), the expected type for >>the parameters in the first function is Item, and that means that it's >>acceptable for the actual parameter to resolve either to Item or >>Item'Class. The consequence is that both of the above functions are >>acceptable interpretations for the construct, and thus the construct >>should be ambiguous. > > > Intersting. Well it does compile and the programs based on it are running > fine. Still if I had made a fundamental mistake here I would like to know > about it. > > With regards > > Martin. > Please forward the actual example to ada-comment@ada-auth.org. I've looked at it, and I think that "we all know" what is meant, but that isn't what the standard says... -- Robert I. Eachus "As far as I'm concerned, war always means failure." -- Jacques Chirac, President of France "As far as France is concerned, you're right." -- Rush Limbaugh