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: 103376,89814ab9e757697a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-20 12:27:09 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: user-defined type conversion Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 14:27:27 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3612.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3719.2500 X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24432 Date: 2002-05-20T14:27:27-05:00 List-Id: Russ <18k11tm001@sneakemail.com> wrote in message ... >It should work fine that way, except that Ada doesn't allow the same >name to be used for a type and a function. I contend that there is no >inherent reason that it shouldn't. I don't see how it is possible for >the compiler to confuse a type with a function. If Ada allowed that, I >could write my own type/unit conversions that have the same syntax as >built-in type conversions. I had this same idea for Ada 200y back in January and proposed it to the ARG. It was discussed extensively on Ada-Comment. It doesn't work (too incompatible), it isn't going to happen. To read why, look at the AC for it: http://www.ada-auth.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/AC-00026.TXT Randy Brukardt ARG Editor