From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: -ve values in enumeration rep clauses.
Date: 1996/06/15
Date: 1996-06-15T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dewar.834846974@schonberg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 4prd9a$muh@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com
Darrel asked about an interesting problem where enuemration literals are
not ordered. This is of course illegal, as GNAT will be happy to inform you:
1. procedure w is
2. type A_Type is
3. ( A, B, C );
4. for A_Type use
5. (
6. A => -1,
7. B => -2,
|
>>> enumeration value for "B" not ordered
8. C => -3
|
>>> enumeration value for "C" not ordered
9. );
10. for A_Type'Size use 8;
11. begin
12. null;
13. end;
prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-06-15 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-06-14 0:00 -ve values in enumeration rep clauses Darel Cullen
1996-06-14 0:00 ` Pascal Ledru
1996-06-14 0:00 ` Adam Beneschan
1996-06-14 0:00 ` James Rhodes
1996-06-15 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox