From: "Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Derived types, private parts, abstract subprograms
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 16:28:01 -0500
Date: 2004-03-08T16:28:01-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <go2dnRzis9__eNHdRVn_iw@comcast.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b4682ab7.0403081231.41281512@posting.google.com>
Adam Beneschan wrote:
> We believe we have found an error in some Ada source code that is
> publicly available on the Internet, that isn't supposed to compile but
> that some compilers apparently let slip through. However, I wanted to
> ask to make sure my interpretation of the RM is correct.
I would suggest you send a bug report to the authors of the code, plus
report this to Ada Comment.
Incidently, I think the code as written is correct. Type T2 is not
abstract, so types derived from it are not abstract types. But this is
one of those "interesting corner cases" which should at least be
documented...
--
Robert I. Eachus
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing." --Edmund Burke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-08 21:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-08 20:31 Derived types, private parts, abstract subprograms Adam Beneschan
2004-03-08 21:28 ` Robert I. Eachus [this message]
2004-03-15 22:43 ` Adam Beneschan
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-03-09 6:53 christoph.grein
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox