Re: Easy question about Character manipulation

["Jeffrey R. Carter" <jrcarter@acm.org>]

(see below) wrote:
> 
> That is the practical effect, but it is not what the formal semantics
> actually says. And, of course, there is more to type than assignment.

Well, there weren't really formal semantics in J&W. But what I was 
getting at was that Pascal didn't have user-defined numeric types. Like 
C, you were stuck with what the compiler gave you, which generally 
corresponded to what the hardware provided. IIRC, for integers you were 
only guaranteed Integer, though most implementations had additional 
sizes. A subrange was still the same size as Integer, but had run-time 
checks to enforce the smaller range, just like an Ada subtype.

I don't recall ever encountering a situation where I couldn't mix 
subranges on any Pascal compiler I used, and I used a few. Of course, 
that doesn't mean there weren't any ...

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Alms for an ex-leper!"
Monty Python's Life of Brian
75