Re: Type qualification & entry calls - can they mix?

Re: Type qualification & entry calls - can they mix?

[Dale Stanbrough]

>Then should the following be legal?
>
>	
>	list'(prots(1)).a;


grrrrr....


that should of course have said...


	fred'(prots(1)).a;
	
	
Dale

Type qualification & entry calls - can they mix?

[Dale Stanbrough]

Consider the following...

	protected type fred is
		entry a;
	end fred;
	
	type list is array(1..10) of fred;
	
	prots :list;
	

Then should the following be legal?

	
	list'(prots(1)).a;


Dale

Re: Type qualification & entry calls - can they mix?

[David Weller]

In article <503itr$aij@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>,
Dale Stanbrough  <dale@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>Consider the following...
>	protected type fred is
>		entry a;
>	end fred;
>	type list is array(1..10) of fred;
>	prots :list;
>Then should the following be legal?
>	list'(prots(1)).a;
>

I believe you meant:

	fred'(prots(1)).a;

But I'm not sure why type qualification would even
be necessary in this case.

-- 
    Visit the Ada 95 Booch Components Homepage: www.ocsystems.com/booch
           This is not your father's Ada -- lglwww.epfl.ch/Ada

Re: Type qualification & entry calls - can they mix?

[Robert A Duff]

In article <503j4h$apb@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>,
Dale Stanbrough  <dale@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>that should of course have said...
>
>	fred'(prots(1)).a;

It is illegal by the syntax rules, because a qualified_expression is an
expression but not a name, and the prefix before the dot has to be a
name (or an impliit_dereference, which is also a name -- aren't
ambiguous grammars fun?).

There are cases where I have wanted to use a qualification as a name, so
this restriction is mildly annoying.

Ada 95 changed some things from expressions to names.  Type_conversions,
for example.  IMHO, we should have gone all the way, and totally
eliminated the distinction between names and other expressions.  The
distinction is unhelpful, and in a few cases, gets in the way.
Certainly a qualified_expression should be allowed in exactly the same
places as a type_conversion.

- Bob