From: Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Odd subtyping error.
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 21:40:50 -0700 (PDT)
Date: 2012-10-05T21:40:50-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b6af56ca-3990-4d3d-b438-992edbbb7a5e@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84ec72b1-bf3e-4f62-a777-00692fbdd7f9@googlegroups.com>
On Friday, October 5, 2012 9:08:07 PM UTC-6, Adam Beneschan wrote:
>
>
> I think you'll have to move the representation clause out of the private part. This shouldn't have any impact, except on readability (which I acknowledge is important); but as far as I know, there is no case where the legality or semantics of a program *using* your package is affected by whether an enumeration representation clause is in the visible or private part.
Hm, I see; this might make it a bit unacceptable readability-wise -- there's already a LOT of stuff in the non-private portion ~ though as a mitigating factor, you wouldn't necessarily have to even look in that file to with/use it.
Thank you for the references too, btw.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-06 4:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-05 16:05 Odd subtyping error Shark8
2012-10-05 18:12 ` Niklas Holsti
2012-10-05 18:44 ` Adam Beneschan
2012-10-05 21:08 ` Shark8
2012-10-05 21:00 ` Shark8
2012-10-05 22:11 ` Adam Beneschan
2012-10-05 22:19 ` Shark8
2012-10-06 3:08 ` Adam Beneschan
2012-10-06 4:40 ` Shark8 [this message]
2012-10-06 21:21 ` sbelmont700
2012-10-06 22:08 ` Shark8
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox