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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5037bf0bb33408c8 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-10-08 08:56:26 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!uio.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: "&" for array versus "&" for Strings Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 15:56:26 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: <200210081153.NAA17399@bulgaria.otn.eurocopter.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1034092586 2907 129.241.83.78 (8 Oct 2002 15:56:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 15:56:26 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29593 Date: 2002-10-08T15:56:26+00:00 List-Id: On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 10:46:39 -0500, David C. Hoos wrote: > That's correct. Without the qualification of its operands, the > compiler selects "&" (Left, Right : String) return String, which > (correctly) returns an error in 3.16w, but is erroneously accepted by > 3.14p. With the qualification of its operands, the compiler selects > "&" (Left, Right : String (1 .. 6)) return Name_Array. Why is "&" (Left, Right : String) return String chosen over the "&" (Left, Right : String (1 .. 6)) return Name_Array in this case? -- Ada95 is good for you. http://libre.act-europe.fr/Software_Matters/02-C_pitfalls.pdf