* Re: derived types
@ 1989-04-23 15:33 Alex Blakemore
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Alex Blakemore @ 1989-04-23 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
Re: 3.4.(15) and 7.4(4)
>> This disallows things like
>> type this is new integer;
>> type that is new this;
> The rationale behind this is due to the fact that a derived type receives
> it's parents subprograms. I.E. ALRM 3.4(13):
> The compiler will not know that all of these have been defined until
> it has finished compiling the spec. This insures that everything that must
> be derived for a new type is known.
OK, the above restrictions make it easier for compilers to make a single pass
over package specs. That alone may justify their inclusion in the reference manual.
Is that the only reason for these restrictions ?
Cascading the derivations across several packages is probably the best
solution but it does introduce other problems, esp if the base type is private.
See Bardin & Thompson's papers in Ada Letters, VIII, 1-2 for examples of
these problems and partial solutions if you're interested.
Alex Blakemore
Software Productivity Consortium
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~1989-04-23 15:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1989-04-23 15:33 derived types Alex Blakemore
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox