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,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,28dcfc3d6dc519b8 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-14 03:53:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!isdnet!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: Christoph Grein Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Renaming subprogram and default_expression Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 12:52:12 +0100 (MET) Organization: ENST, France Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1013687582 23505 137.194.161.2 (14 Feb 2002 11:53:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 11:53:02 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Content-MD5: jCcDwyPgmoGHfcAOwZQw1g== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk X-Reply-To: Christoph Grein List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19997 Date: 2002-02-14T12:52:12+01:00 > From: Florian Weimer > > Is anything wrong with the following program? Maybe I'm just > confused, but it looks perfectly legal to me. > > procedure Defaults is > > type Typ is new Integer; > > procedure Original (X : Typ); <--- declaration > procedure Renamed (X : Typ := -1); <--- declaration > > procedure Renamed (X : Typ := -1) <--- renaming as body > renames Original; > > procedure Original (X : Typ) is <--- proper body > begin > null; > end Original; > > begin > null; > end Defaults; So it looks OK. Did some compiler complain?