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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-30 02:21:54 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.xtra.co.nz!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "AG" <ang@xtra.co.nz>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <badvd5$raumj$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <wcc65o5bdib.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <vcqfcmacq3r461@corp.supernews.com>
 <Gdeza.49896$zt.17929@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <vcsqis9d21of7@corp.supernews.com> <3ECFF541.1010705@attbi.com>
 <3ED0B820.5050603@noplace.com> <m59Aa.14549$fT5.5136@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <3ED2096F.3020800@noplace.com> <WPqAa.18139$fT5.7613@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <3ED353BE.40605@noplace.com> <bb1umi$4jh5e$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <3ED4A323.3000909@noplace.com> <bb2c3v$4sq9s$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <vda1gap101p119@corp.supernews.com> <3ED5E8DE.8070308@noplace.com>
 <dstanbro-D4C3C0.18423630052003@mec2.bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Re: Saturated Math
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Message-ID: <SoFBa.544$JA5.8476@news.xtra.co.nz>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 21:22:37 +1200
NNTP-Posting-Host: 219.88.60.240
X-Complaints-To: newsadmin@xtra.co.nz
X-Trace: news.xtra.co.nz 1054286514 219.88.60.240 (Fri,
 30 May 2003 21:21:54 NZST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 21:21:54 NZST
Organization: Xtra
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38059
Date: 2003-05-30T21:22:37+12:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dale Stanbrough" <dstanbro@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:dstanbro-D4C3C0.18423630052003@mec2.bigpond.net.au...
> I've just tried writing such a package (generic) and it doesn't seem
> that it would be altogether seemless for the end user.
>
> Given a declaration like this...

How about the following:
[Just checked it on Gnat and it compiles fine]

Declars:

generic

type number is range <>;


package saturated is

type saturated_number is new number;

function "+"(left, right: saturated_number) return saturated_number;

end;

----------------------------

Usage:

----------------------------

with saturated;

procedure main is

package saturated_int is new saturated(integer);

use saturated_int;

x: saturated_number := 4;

begin

  x := x + 2;

end;

----------------------------


> a calling procedure would look like this...
>
> procedure main is
>    type Number is new Integer range 1..5;
>
>    package Saturated_Int is new Saturate (Number);
>    use Saturated_Int;
>
>    x : Number := 4;
> begin
>    x := Saturated_Int."+" (x, 2);
>    x := Saturated_Int."-" (x, 6);
> end;
>
>
> The function "+" in the following
>
>    x := x + 2;
>
> is said to be ambiguous with Standard."+" (according
> to gnat).

In this case, the problem seems to be that the compiler
(quite rightly) can't tell which "+" you mean since there
are, in fact, two implementations visible at that spot.

Regards
.