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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5ccd8ee851fe2e00
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: brashear@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us (Philip Brashear)
Subject: Re: Record aggregate question (language lawyer needed!)
Date: 1996/06/24
Message-ID: <4qlv2a$1pf@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 161871949
references: <mcriley.835361851@BIX.com>
 <31CAEC7B.446B9B3D@escmail.orl.mmc.com>
organization: None
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-06-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <31CAEC7B.446B9B3D@escmail.orl.mmc.com>,
Theodore E. Dennison <dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com> wrote:
>Technically, I think they are of two different (anonymous) types,
>both of which happen to be subtypes of STRING.
>
>
>-- 
>T.E.D.          
>                |  Work - mailto:dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com  |
>                |  Home - mailto:dennison@iag.net              |
>                |  URL  - http://www.iag.net/~dennison         |


'Fraid not, T.E.D.  As you (almost) stated yourself, they're both of type
STRING.  It's type that counts here, not subtype.  Note the component
declarations themselves: they include a type name (STRING), plus a constraint.
They're not anonymous.

(This whole question of "others" in aggregates has always been a tough one
to explain.)

Phil Brashear