On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:20:15 -0700 (PDT), Eric Hughes wrote:
> Perhaps you could explain what you want universal_integer to be.
On Apr 15, 9:23 am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> Merely the type of a static numeric expression. Well, it isn't, a
> counterexample is:
>
> A'Length (ARM 3.6.2)
The fact that lengths are limited does not mean that their values
cannot sit within a type whose values are not. The set of possible
values of lengths for a certain compiler are a subset of the values of
universal_integer.
> Universal_Integer is not necessarily Root_Integer, but somewhere close
to
> the root of Root_Integer'Class.
"Somewhere close" is not a definition. Please be more specific.
> > If you can show me a Ada definition that can store a
> > universal_integer, only then will I believe you that it's the kind of
> > type that's just like an ordinary Ada type.
>
> type T is abstract private;
>
> Can you store T?
By ordinary type, I mean the kind that's assignable, not abstract, not
an interface, something you can declare a variable of.
Eric
|
