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: 103376,34d47d048b177d0b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Jon S Anthony <jsa@synquiry.com>
Subject: Re: limited/non-limited in Ada95
Date: 1997/10/22
Message-ID: <ufwwj5mxc6.fsf@synquiry.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 282480470
References: <3442C2A3.3781@bix.com> <ufhgaghueo.fsf@synquiry.com>
 <mheaney-ya023680001810971145040001@news.ni.net>
 <JSA.97Oct20202120@alexandria.synquiry.com> <EIFDy2.1uo@world.std.com>
 <dewar.877513489@merv>
Distribution: world
Organization: PSINet
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-10-22T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:

> iRobert Duff said
> 
> <<Well, the rest of the world hasn't seen your GC stuff.  At least I
> haven't.  So I can't quite understand what you're getting at, here.
> What's wrong with having:
> 
>     type T is limited private;
> 
> then:
> 
>     type T_Contents is ...; -- not limited!
>     type T is
>         limited record -- to keep Henry from stealing bank accounts ;-)
>             Contents: T_Contents;
>         end record;>>
> 
> 
> Nothing's wrong with that, it would work fine, despite heated rhetoric
> from people having trouble figuring out how to solve this problem :-)

Of course, you actually have no clue as you have not seen the stuff.

/Jon

-- 
Jon Anthony
Synquiry Technologies, Ltd., Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha!  The way my life's been going lately,
 Who'd notice?"  -- Londo Mollari