From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: One type for all
Date: 1999/07/17
Date: 1999-07-17T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7mqueq$k7e$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1999Jul12.193436.1@eisner
In article <1999Jul12.193436.1@eisner>,
Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote:
> Obviously "vacation" is not one of Robert's core
> competencies... :-)
Well I am not sure I get that joke, but I am a little surprised
that no one has chimed in here to give the exact Pascal rules
from the standard (either one :-)
The one reply was about anonymous types, which is really quite
a different issue than the basic issue of whether a language
uses structural or named type equivalence.
Robert Dewar
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-07-17 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
1999-07-12 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-07-17 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1999-07-18 0:00 ` Samuel T. Harris
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 ` Robert A Duff
1999-07-20 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-07-19 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-07-20 0:00 ` Bill Findlay
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