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: 103376,184737148aef02ac
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Subject: Re: Fixed point multiplication ambiguity
Date: 1999/02/01
Message-ID: <EACHUS.99Feb1145032@spectre.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 439470758
References: <78sojm$crk$1@plug.news.pipex.net>
 <F6BzAA.KKI.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-02-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <F6BzAA.KKI.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com> stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) writes:

 > I could see some change in the handling of fixed-point multiplication
 > in Ada 200X.  It has been a source of incompatibilities and surprises.
 > Other than that, though, any significant change to the overload
 > resolution rules is *extremely* unlikely in my view.

   Note that putting some other visible fixed-point type in Standard
would fix the most surprising case discussed above.  It would never be
possible then for Duration to appear out of the blue.
--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...