{Spam?} Re: [vhdl-200x] Modular types

> > We could split modular types into two using the same syntax
> > (enumerated
> > types are also split into two: characters ones and the others).
> > No complexity here.
> in other words, this option would reduce to (2).

Yes.

> > Strongly in favour of 2) after the Ada experience.
> 
> I'm interested : what about the Ada logical operators (there are no
> shift operators) on modular types is problematic in practice?
> 
> The semantics struck me as a bit odd, but I presumed that was
> academic since I didn't think anyone actually used them!

Indeed.

> Is it a matter of the implementation burden, or are there practical
> drawbacks too?

Not really complex, but why implementing something useless ?
I think useless features don't make a good image of a language.

Maybe personal taste !

Tristan.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.