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-Thread: 103376,9b7d3a51d0d8b6ee X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Adam Beneschan Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Extending discriminant types Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:32:24 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <5def7b37-fe8b-4f90-a8ee-895cdcd9f00d@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com> References: <20081115101632.5f98c596@cube.tz.axivion.com> <26f0cb8c-eb3e-4c0d-85d1-f45e2c1ba4c6@j38g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <6fcfeaa4-e70c-4f58-aa69-0e5aac145000@x8g2000yqk.googlegroups.com> <49254dd7$0$30232$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <20081120165726.49711dbf@cube.tz.axivion.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1227227545 31251 127.0.0.1 (21 Nov 2008 00:32:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:32:25 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.7.12-1.3.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2720 Date: 2008-11-20T16:32:24-08:00 List-Id: On Nov 20, 7:57 am, Stefan Bellon wrote: > On Thu, 20 Nov, Robert A Duff wrote: > > I think the original example in this thread confused things by calling > > the root type "Base". It would be better to say "type Root is ..." > > in an example like that. > > Mea culpa. ;-) Naah, I don't think so. The original question didn't have anything to do with the 'Base attribute at all, and there wouldn't have been any confusion until I decided to bring the attribute up. And I didn't even notice that the type name was named "Base", so I wasn't confused about that, just about whether the attribute was legal. But if it's anybody's culpa, it's probably mea. -- Adam