From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com>
Subject: Re: GNAT controlled types
Date: 1998/01/28
Date: 1998-01-28T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980128145319.2158A-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: EnH6KM.L2I.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com
On Wed, 28 Jan 1998, Tucker Taft wrote:
>
> The decision to base controlled types on type extension was an attempt
> to ensure a relatively straightforward implementation, where the
> root controlled type would contain links for inserting the controlled
> object on a linked list. Ultimately, other considerations (such as
> "mutable" discriminated types) pushed us to abandon the
> links-through-the-object implementation model in our Ada 95 front end,
> but I believe other compilers have taken advantage of the type
> extension approach.
Could you elaborate a bit more on why you switched implementation models,
and how your front end implements them now? I used to hold the same view
as Nick, i.e. that this conflation of Controlled-ness and tagged-ness was
a flaw, and I changed my mind after trying to figure out alternative
approaches.
-- Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1998-01-28 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1998-01-25 0:00 GNAT errormessage question Haug Buerger
[not found] ` <EnCrzw.EHw@world.std.com>
1998-01-26 0:00 ` GNAT controlled types Nick Roberts
1998-01-26 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
[not found] ` <EnEu4B.6rr@world.std.com>
1998-01-27 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1998-01-28 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1998-01-28 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff [this message]
1998-01-29 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1998-02-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox