The intended wording is "The implicitly declared ... subprograms appropriate for the type." For example, file types have several implicitly declared procedures and one implicitly declared function. Perhaps the wording "appropriate for the type" is misleading, since this has a technical meaning (for prefixes.) The LRM does use the word "appropriate" in several contexts. Any suggestions for improved reading? Chuck Peter Ashenden wrote: >Folks, > >The proposed wording for identifying declarations to be made potentially >visible along with a used type or subtype is: > > b) The implicitly declared operations, enumeration literals (for > enumeration types), physical units (for physical types) and > subprograms appropriate for the type, or any subprograms or > operators that are explicitly declared immediately within the > same declarative region as the type and that hide an implicitly > declared subprogram or operator. > >I think "subprograms appropriate for the type" is a hang-over from when we >were considering including all subprograms with the type in their >signatures. Is that right? If so, we should delete it. If not, what does >it refer to? > >Thanks. > >Cheers, > >PA > >-- >Dr. Peter J. Ashenden peter@ashenden.com.au >Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd. www.ashenden.com.au >PO Box 640 Ph: +61 8 8339 7532 >Stirling, SA 5152 Fax: +61 8 8339 2616 >Australia Mobile: +61 414 70 9106 > > >Received on Mon Mar 21 16:02:56 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Mar 21 2005 - 16:02:56 PST