Related articles |
---|
Re: Possible to write compiler to Java VM? ncohen@watson.ibm.com (1996-01-29) |
Safety and power in languages truesoft!sw@uunet.uu.net (1996-02-02) |
Re: Safety and power in languages bobduff@world.std.com (1996-02-04) |
Re: Safety and power in languages salomon@silver.cs.umanitoba.ca (1996-02-09) |
Re: Safety and power in languages truesoft!sw@uunet.uu.net (1996-02-09) |
Re: Safety and power in languages mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (1996-02-12) |
Re: Safety and power in languages fabre@gr.osf.org (Christian Fabre) (1996-02-13) |
Re: Safety and power in languages eachus@spectre.mitre.org (1996-02-13) |
Re: Safety and power in languages darius@phidani.be (Darius Blasband) (1996-02-13) |
Re: Safety and power in languages Roger@natron.demon.co.uk (Roger Barnett) (1996-02-14) |
From: | eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers,comp.lang.ada |
Date: | 13 Feb 1996 00:31:59 -0500 |
Organization: | The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA. |
References: | 96-01-116 96-02-026 96-02-057 |
Keywords: | Ada, design |
salomon@silver.cs.umanitoba.ca (Daniel J. Salomon) writes:
> ...Ada requires that all variant records have an explicit discriminant...
Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying here, but I think I
am not. Ada TYPES with variants must have explicit discriminants, but
objects of (constrained) subtypes do not need to contain discriminant
values. So it is possible to map a C union without discriminant to a
matching Ada type, but, as you indicate is required in C, the
programmer will have to know which view to take.
I won't even ask why you would want to do such a silly thing,
since I have been forced to do it for the same reasons--usually
because some hardware designer got cute.
--
Robert I. Eachus
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.