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,d57302f2954365e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Question about base types
Date: 1997/01/29
Message-ID: <dewar.854545502@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 213029743
references: <mheaney-ya023280002601971414080001@news.ni.net>
 <32ECD6B6.3B5A@elca-matrix.ch>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-01-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Mats said

"No, but almost. the first line is wrong and should read

type <anonomous parent of T> is range <min> .. <max>;"


That's still wrong, or at least confusing, since it implies that the
anonymous parent of T is constrained, which is wrong.

The implicit declaration is more like

  type <anonymous parent of T> is new predefined-integer-type

where predefined-integer-type is one of the predefined base types, e.g.
integer'base (NOT integer).

Note that in Ada 95, the base types of integer types are NOT constrained,
for example Integer'Base is not a constrained type. Implementations are
allowed to restrict the values of type Integer'Base that they handle, but
conceptually, Integer'Base includes all possible integer values.