From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Blady Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: error: choice must be static? Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 09:51:39 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 08:51:39 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3742d425f9950990e38548bf005fe799"; logging-data="363118"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19B5AOfpj0ZrO7P5i5Xb9s8" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:s1PF/6zl0DlBoEzCO1M6LujqAQY= Content-Language: fr, en-US In-Reply-To: Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:66071 List-Id: Le 14/02/2024 à 05:28, Randy Brukardt a écrit : > Ah, yes, didn't notice that part. One cannot give the Aggregate aspect on an > array type, directly or indirectly. That's because container aggregates are > designed to work like array aggregates, and we didn't want visibility to > determine the interpretation of an aggregate (especially where the same > syntax could have a different meaning in different visibility).. Thus, there > can be no point where a single type can have both array aggregates and > container aggregates. > > Note that record aggregates and container aggregates are always syntactally > different, and thus it is OK to have both in a single location (that's one > of the reasons that we adopted square brackets for container aggregates). > That seemed important as the majority of private types are completed by > record types, and not allowing record types in this context would be > difficult to work around. Thanks Randy for the explanation, it helps. Pascal.