Re: Is it really Ok to assert that the Ada syntax is a context-free grammar ?

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>]

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:

> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 02:34:34 -0800 (PST), Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>
>> Martin Krischik wrote:
>>> Jeffrey R. Carter schrieb:
>>>> X (Y) cannot represent a type cast because Ada does not have anything
>>>> called "type cast".
>>>
>>> Not quite, if you consider "type cast" is a unchecked bit pattern copy -
>>> so if you define:
>> 
>> Jeffrey is correct; it is not a "type cast", it is a "type conversion"
>> and there is no such thing as "Ada.Unchecked_Cast".
>
> ARM 13.7.2.

I don't see the phrase "type cast" in that section; what is your
point?

Jeffrey's point was about the specific phrase "type cast"; that is
_not_ defined by the Ada language.

-- 
-- Stephe