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: 103376,9fb7299100a4c4db X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dennison@telepath.com Subject: Re: Abstract realizations can't be inherited?? Date: 1998/08/31 Message-ID: <6se8fs$7lt$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 386414446 References: <6s6gku$gk6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x4.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130 Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Aug 31 13:29:32 1998 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.05 [en] (WinNT; I) Date: 1998-08-31T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) wrote: > This sounds like a compiler bug. If a type is non-abstract, then by > defintion all of its primitive procedures are non-abstract, even > if an overriding is done in the private part. > > Time to file a bug report... Awwww, again? :-) I know I really should take Tucker's word for this, but I'd appreciate it if someone would compile this example w/ a non-Aonix compiler and see if they get an error. I'd hate to send in a bug report reading, "Tucker Taft says this is wrong". -- T.E.D. -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum