Selon Peter Ashenden <peter@ashenden.com.au>:
> Tristan,
>
> > Do you mean protected types are second-class types ?
> > It appears it would be very impossible to associate
> > access/file/protected types to formal types, doesn't it ?
>
> The current proposal assumes only that assignment is defined for the formal
> type and requires that the actual type has assignment. (So in the modified
> example, I should have included "=" as a formal subprogram as well.)
>
> Thus, access types would be legal as actual types, but file types and
> protected types would not.
Ok, thanks for the precision.
As a consequence, you can't declare a signal or a port with a formal type.
Tough.
Tristan.
Received on Fri Jan 21 03:38:54 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jan 21 2005 - 03:39:06 PST