Re: Announce: Grace project site operational

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

That's O.K. Its a trial baloon. If nobody ever floats a new idea for fear of
being called stupid or because they have not worked out every possible
detail, then not many ideas will get floated. Tossing it out there might
stimulate some other creative souls to come up with even better ideas. If
nothing else, you can find out if anyone likes the idea.

Would you want to use something more like:

type Count is range <> use Natural ;

.... thus insisting that the formal and the default have the same
characteristics? Although, I'd probably want to also be able to supply any
default type that minimally satisfied the requirements of the formal, so
maybe it needs a lot of syntax variations.

How about:

type defining_identifier [discriminant] is formal_type_definition [=>
default_type] ;

As in:

type Count is range <> => Natural ;

That is a little more like the formal => actual association you can have at
the instantiation.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:udllen75oc322b@corp.supernews.com...
>
> Something like:
>
>     type Count is (<>) use Natural;
>
> seems like it would work. Probably worth thinking about a bit. (Warning:
> I have made no effort to think about the ramifications of this idea!!)
>