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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ee34e610c168cb3f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Tool to expand generics?
Date: 1995/04/18
Message-ID: <dewar.798251343@gnat>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 101107949
references: <3mu3bs$ptf@sequoia.jrs.com> <3n0t9c$24k@sequoia.jrs.com>
 <3n113i$fg6@pulsar.sky.net> <3n1jtk$a0v@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1995-04-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

It is not at all easy to do accurate source expansion of generics. If it
were, then generics would be easy to compile, and they are not :-(

For example, calls that are unambiguous in the template may look ambiguous
in expanded source when you obliterate the distinction between actual and
formal subtypes. 

Similarly (Ada 95) expressions in the template that are legal but will
raise CE, may become illegal in the expanded source because the values
are outside the base range of the actual generic type.

<fill in LOTS more cases here if you ever implemented generics>

Generics are NOT macros!