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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,63a41ccea0fc803a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,911abff935bc47c X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public From: nospam@thanks.com.au (Don Harrison) Subject: Re: Naming of Tagged Types and Associated Packages Date: 1998/08/14 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 380939301 Sender: news@syd.csa.com.au X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dev7 References: Organization: CSC Australia, Sydney Reply-To: nospam@thanks.com.au Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1998-08-14T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Bob Duff wrote: :nospam@thanks.com.au (Don Harrison) writes: : :> In Ada, is all syntax involving entities and types similarly unambiguous? :> If so, the requirement, in Ada, that an entity and it's type have different :> names is an unnecessary one. : :Almost, but not quite. Eg, "Mumble'First" is a legal expression whether :Mumble is a type or an array object. And "pragma Import(Eiffel, Mumble);" :is legal for practically any sort of Mumble. Thanks for the clarification. Without checking, it appears there are few such ambiguities, so it might be possible to remove them in a future revision if considered worthwhile. Don. Don Harrison donh at syd.csa.com.au