From: Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Instantiating a generic formal procedure with an access procedure value
Date: 2000/01/13
Date: 2000-01-13T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <x7vso02zdip.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 85jho4$5a9$1@nnrp1.deja.com
Jeff Carter <jrcarter001@my-deja.com> writes:
> OK, Tucker Taft's favorite front end accepts the instantiation, but
> GNAT does not. Now hopefully the language lawyers and compiler
> implementers will answer (or argue) the question: Which is correct?
If I were you I'd send the report along to report@gnat.com
anyway.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-01-13 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-12-31 0:00 Instantiating a generic formal procedure with an access procedure value Jeff Carter
2000-01-03 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
2000-01-04 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
2000-01-04 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
2000-01-05 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
2000-01-05 0:00 ` Ed Falis
2000-01-12 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
2000-01-12 0:00 ` Simon Wright
2000-01-13 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
2000-01-13 0:00 ` Simon Wright [this message]
2000-01-13 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
2000-01-14 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox