From: "Alejandro R. Mosteo" <alejandro@mosteo.com>
Subject: Re: Generic private type declaration
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 15:57:34 +0100
Date: 2016-11-28T15:57:34+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <o1hgii$ugg$2@dont-email.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26727abf-a679-4733-a424-45deb30a597e@googlegroups.com>
On 25/11/16 20:18, AdaMagica wrote:
> RM 12.5.1(5/3) ... For a formal derived type declaration, the reserved words *with private* shall appear if and only if the ancestor type is a tagged type; in this case the formal derived type is a private extension of the ancestor type and the ancestor shall not be a class-wide type...
>
My interpretation is that the formal used in my example belongs to
12.5.1(2), formal private type. This is of course assuming that the
generic formal declaration is interpreted from inside the generic and
not from the actual instance type used?
I had assumed that 3/2 applies when you want to make explicit to the
generic that the type comes from some form of derivation.
Alex.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-28 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-25 17:36 Generic private type declaration Alejandro R. Mosteo
2016-11-25 19:17 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2016-11-28 14:54 ` Alejandro R. Mosteo
2016-11-25 19:18 ` AdaMagica
2016-11-28 14:57 ` Alejandro R. Mosteo [this message]
2016-11-25 19:38 ` G.B.
2016-11-26 8:45 ` Jacob Sparre Andersen
2016-11-26 19:18 ` Tero Koskinen
2016-11-28 15:05 ` Alejandro R. Mosteo
2016-11-28 21:32 ` Randy Brukardt
2016-11-29 11:12 ` Alejandro R. Mosteo
2016-11-29 11:42 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2016-11-29 23:48 ` Randy Brukardt
2016-11-28 23:25 ` Robert Eachus
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox