C strongly typed?
Richard O'keefe
ok at goanna.oz.au
Fri Mar 9 10:14:38 AEST 1990
In article <5880 at crdgw1.crd.ge.com>,
rimvallm at jupiter.crd.ge.com (Magnus Rimvall) writes:
> In article <2963 at goanna.oz.au> you write:
> > declare
> > subtype apple is integer;
> > subtype orange is integer;
> Obviously, you either know very little about Ada or you deliberately
> try to misinform the reader.
Those are fighting words. I shall reply in kind:
surely you either know very little about C or you are being deliberately
insulting.
The point is that I *do* understand Ada well enough to show CORRECTLY
what the Ada equivalent of the C fragment in question is. Rimvall's
suggested version using NEW is *not* expressible in C *nor* in Pascal.
What I was saying is that the C typedef
typedef int apple;
is the equivalent of
subtype apple is integer;
How does this count as ignorance or misinformation?
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list