From: "Mark Lundquist" <no.spam@getalife.com>
Subject: Ada95 language design question (accessibility rules and type extensions)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:27:21 GMT
Date: 2001-12-18T18:27:21+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dULT7.2153$NM4.98008@rwcrnsc53> (raw)
The invocation of accessibility rules in RM 3.9.1(3) is designed to prevent
dangling dispatch. It seems to me that another way would have been to
disallow assignment of a tagged type to the classwide type of a statically
shallower parent. Does anyone know why that would not have worked?
What got me started thinking on this was the common complaint about the
implementation of controlledness, and the ramification of this rule that
controlled types can't be declared deeper than library-level...
-- mark
--------------
Reply by email to: Mark dot Lundquist at ACM dot org
Consulting services: http://home.attbi.com/~mlundquist2/consulting
next reply other threads:[~2001-12-18 18:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-18 18:27 Mark Lundquist [this message]
2001-12-20 22:13 ` Ada95 language design question (accessibility rules and type extensions) Nick Roberts
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox