From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: One type for all
Date: 1999/07/12
Date: 1999-07-12T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7mdobd$fu$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3786741C.E73F1124@hso.link.com
In article <3786741C.E73F1124@hso.link.com>,
"Samuel T. Harris" <sam_harris@hso.link.com> wrote:
> Types in both Ada 83 and Ada 95 use name-equivalence instead
> of structural-equivalence (as is found in Pascal).
Am I really misremembering Pascal that badly. Surely Pascal
has name equivalence, e.g. if you declare two identical
record types with different names, they are different types.
I think you are confusing name/structural equivalence with the
different rules in Pascal about compatibility of types.
But perhaps I am remembering wrong ...
I'm on vacation so my Pascal texts are out of reach :-)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-07-12 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <3783E0D2.5D74243@boeing.com>
1999-07-08 0:00 ` One type for all czgrr
1999-07-09 0:00 ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-07-10 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-07-12 0:00 ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-07-12 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1999-07-12 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-07-17 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-07-18 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1999-07-19 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-07-18 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1999-07-19 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-07-19 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-07-20 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-07-20 0:00 ` Bill Findlay
1999-07-18 0:00 ` Samuel T. Harris
1999-07-12 0:00 ` Samuel T. Harris
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox