From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Blady
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: error: choice must be static?
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 09:51:39 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID:
References:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 08:51:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3742d425f9950990e38548bf005fe799";
logging-data="363118"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19B5AOfpj0ZrO7P5i5Xb9s8"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:s1PF/6zl0DlBoEzCO1M6LujqAQY=
Content-Language: fr, en-US
In-Reply-To:
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:66071
List-Id:
Le 14/02/2024 à 05:28, Randy Brukardt a écrit :
> Ah, yes, didn't notice that part. One cannot give the Aggregate aspect on an
> array type, directly or indirectly. That's because container aggregates are
> designed to work like array aggregates, and we didn't want visibility to
> determine the interpretation of an aggregate (especially where the same
> syntax could have a different meaning in different visibility).. Thus, there
> can be no point where a single type can have both array aggregates and
> container aggregates.
>
> Note that record aggregates and container aggregates are always syntactally
> different, and thus it is OK to have both in a single location (that's one
> of the reasons that we adopted square brackets for container aggregates).
> That seemed important as the majority of private types are completed by
> record types, and not allowing record types in this context would be
> difficult to work around.
Thanks Randy for the explanation, it helps.
Pascal.