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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,66253344eaef63db X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,66253344eaef63db X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,66253344eaef63db X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-30 11:28:43 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.lang.c++ Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!inmet!dsd!stt From: stt@dsd.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) Subject: Re: Mut. Recurs. in Ada9X w/o Breaking Encaps.? Message-ID: Keywords: Ada 9X, C++, object-oriented Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com Organization: Intermetrics, Inc. References: <1994Sep27.165203.9192@swlvx2.msd.ray.com> <36eebb$jn5@disunms.epfl.ch> <1994Sep30.111050@di.epfl.ch> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 1994 13:22:11 GMT Xref: bga.com comp.lang.ada:6338 comp.object:6925 comp.lang.c++:31107 Date: 1994-09-30T13:22:11+00:00 List-Id: In article <1994Sep30.111050@di.epfl.ch>, Magnus Kempe wrote: >stt@spock.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) writes: >: >: The type conversion toward the end of your example is >: illegal (at least according to *our* Ada 9X front end ;-). > >Damn. Thanks. Here's a fix, which is also accepted by GNAT :-) >Is your Ada 9X front end a program, or a human? Our Ada 9X front end is a program. In fact, when it complained about your source, I initially presumed our front end was wrong. But instead, it was the human who was wrong. I guess our front end is doing pretty well now that it has surpassed the MRT in being able to compile Ada 9X ;-). In any case, our front end likes your fix. > ... >-- >Magnus Kempe "I know not what course others may take, but as for me, >Magnus.Kempe@di.epfl.ch Give me Liberty... or give me Death!" -- Patrick Henry -Tucker Taft stt@inmet.com