From: James Alan Farrell <jfarrell@grammatech.com>
Subject: Re: Syntax question: new with a constrained subtype indication
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 12:37:17 -0400
Date: 2005-04-25T12:37:17-04:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <426d1d0e$1_2@newsfeed.slurp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <426d183e$0$30465$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be>
Adrien Plisson wrote:
> James Alan Farrell wrote:
>
>> V := new Vector range 1 .. 10;
>
>
> Vector is a composite type, not a scalar type, so i don't think you can
> apply a scalar_constraint to this type. (but you are right, the grammar
> does not forbid it explicitly).
>
Actually I just noticed about the scalar vs composit. So is there any
time when using a scalar constraint is reasonable/allowed with the new
operator? I will take your advice and read 3.2.2. I hope I wont have
to read the *WHOLE* text to answer this one question -- it is too large
and I get lost and confused ;)
> have you looked at 3.2.2 and subsequent chapters to see what is said
> about constraints ? hint: often things are not forbidden in the grammar
> but additional constraints can be found by reading the whole text.
>
Thank you (and Alex) for your rapid replies.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-25 16:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-25 15:44 Syntax question: new with a constrained subtype indication James Alan Farrell
2005-04-25 16:07 ` Alex R. Mosteo
2005-04-25 16:34 ` James Alan Farrell
2005-04-25 18:52 ` Martin Krischik
2005-04-26 14:17 ` James Alan Farrell
2005-04-25 16:18 ` Adrien Plisson
2005-04-25 16:37 ` James Alan Farrell [this message]
2005-04-25 17:16 ` Adrien Plisson
2005-04-25 16:34 ` Martin Krischik
2005-04-25 19:03 ` James Alan Farrell
2005-04-25 17:02 ` Martin Dowie
2005-04-25 17:22 ` Adrien Plisson
2005-04-25 23:28 ` Randy Brukardt
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox