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: 103376,6cd0753a57f9edec
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Resolution of Dispatching Operations
Date: 1997/02/24
Message-ID: <E64Lzz.FJI@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 221151982
References: <mheaney-ya023680002302970035510001@news.ni.net>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-02-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <mheaney-ya023680002302970035510001@news.ni.net>,
Matthew Heaney <mheaney@ni.net> wrote:
>procedure Op (L : in T; R : in out T'Class);
>
>procedure Op (L : in T'Class; R : in out T);

>declare
>   O1, O2 : T'Class;
>begin
>   Op (O1, O2);

This is ambiguous, so you should get a compiler time error.

This really has nothing to do with dispatching -- it's just the
compile-time overload resolution rules that are involved.

IMHO, allowing an ambiguous statement to run, and do who-knows-what, is
a pretty serious compiler bug!

- Bob