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,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney)
Subject: Question about base types
Date: 1997/01/26
Message-ID: <mheaney-ya023280002601971414080001@news.ni.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 212398481
content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
organization: Estormza Software
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-01-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



I have a question about the relationship between types, first named
subtypes, and base types.

If I declare an integer type, say

type T is range 1 .. 10;

Then I think that according to the Ada model this means I'm declaring some
unnamed type, but whose first named subtype is T:

type <anonomous parent of T> is System.Min_Int .. System.Max_Int;
subtype T is <anonomous parent of T> range 1 .. 10;

Do I have this correct?

Now what is the relationship of T'Base to this model?  Is T'Base the name
of the anonomous parent type

type T'Base is System.Min_Int .. System.Max_Int;
subtype T is T'Base range 1 ..  10;

Did the "anonmous parent" go away in Ada 95?  Or is it still

type <anon> is range System.Min_Int .. System.Max_Int;
subtype T is <anon> range 1 .. 10;

and T'Base simply "refers" to this anonomous type?

I can declare objects of type T'Base, right?

O : T'Base;

Is this declaration the same as

O : <anonomous parent of T>;

Enquiring minds want to know...

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Heaney
Software Development Consultant
<mailto:matthew_heaney@acm.org>
(818) 985-1271