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,c3a7c1845ec5caf9
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Equality operator overloading in ADA 83
Date: 1997/04/26
Message-ID: <dewar.862088843@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 237597933
References: <01bc4e9b$ac0e7fa0$72041dc2@lightning>
 <mheaney-ya023680002404971929220001@news.ni.net> <dewar.861970700@merv>
 <5jsfdm$e50@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <E99D0L.6Eo@world.std.com>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Duff said

<<Robert, unless I'm confused about what you're talking about, I think
you're remembering an earlier version of Ada 9X.  Ada 95 is the same as
Ada 83 in this regard.

In Ada 83, if you declare an exception in a generic, then each instance
of that generic has its own copy of that exception.  This follows from
the fact that generic instantiation is defined as a textual copy, with
some exceptions (the main exception being that name resolution is not
"redone" on the instance).>>

Oops yes, sorry, I was indeed remembering the earlier version. So in fact
we still have complete semantic consistency between the code sharing and
macro instantiations -- boy that rule about separate exceptions must be
a real pain for the generic code sharing guys :-)