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,fd63afa4dc364b7e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-03-22 08:44:20 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.mesh.ad.jp!uunet!osa.uu.net!dfw.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!bobduff From: Robert A Duff Subject: Re: Static typing (Was Re: Better support for garbage collection) Sender: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:40:01 GMT References: <98m938$2iod0$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de><98pgs1$32up7$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de><98umc6$39coj$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5999 Date: 2001-03-22T16:40:01+00:00 List-Id: "Ken Garlington" writes: > More generally, of course, there are rational numbers that are not exactly > representable as floating point numbers, so I don't see why a compiler > should accept x/y as a floating-point literal. You misunderstand my point. Of course x/y is not a literal. My claim is that you shouldn't have to write ".0" on a floating point literal that happens to be an integer. That is, X: Float := 0; Y: Float := 1/2; should be legal. - Bob