From: Marius Amado Alves <amado.alves@netcabo.pt>
To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org
Subject: Re: library level required or not?
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 23:32:43 +0000
Date: 2004-03-01T23:32:43+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mailman.52.1078183755.327.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x7vu118cofj.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
> > If you look at the GNAT sources for example, you'll find that
> > Unbounded_String is controlled. And yet you can declare an unbounded
> > string inside a 'main' program. Try pulling that out with your own
> > controlled type.
>
> ?
>
> There is a difference between instantiating the generic, which amounts
> to defining a new type derived from Controlled, and declaring an
> instance of a type
You're right, I mixed things up... a bit.
> .. is this 3.9.1(3)?
I think so, that it is that clause that ultimately obliges controlled objects
to be defined at library level. So what's the deal with Unbounded_String?
(ISNBAL too, obvioulsy.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-01 23:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200403011717.22528.maa@liacc.up.pt>
2004-03-01 18:49 ` library level required or not? Marius Amado Alves
2004-03-01 18:41 ` Preben Randhol
2004-03-01 19:21 ` Marius Amado Alves
2004-03-01 20:17 ` Simon Wright
2004-03-01 23:32 ` Marius Amado Alves [this message]
2004-03-02 2:36 ` Robert I. Eachus
2004-03-01 17:17 Marius Amado Alves
2004-03-01 23:37 ` Randy Brukardt
2004-03-02 0:21 ` Marius Amado Alves
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox