Conversion rules: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:Compiler]] | ||
{{Warning|'''Warning''': Article under development}} | {{Warning|'''Warning''': Article under development}} | ||
==== | ==Introduction== | ||
This article discusses issues recently discovered for the following two validity rules: | |||
8.15.7 Validity: ''Conversion Procedure rule'', Validity code: '''VYCP'''<br> | |||
8.15.8 Validity: ''Conversion Query rule'', Validity code: '''VYCQ''' | |||
==Examples== | |||
For the following examples eweasel tests have been created. Their named | |||
====Example 1==== | |||
eweasel test: convert-to-current-type | |||
<code>[eiffel,N] | |||
class A[G] | |||
convert | |||
to_a: {A[G]} | |||
feature | |||
to_a: A[G] | |||
end | |||
</code> | |||
The conversion to '''A[G]''' should indeed not be valid because they are conform. | |||
The only rule that matters in our case is '''VYCQ(3)'''. | |||
What VYCQ(3) asks is the following | |||
Is A[ANY] conform to A[G]? | |||
As we answer this question clearly with '''no''', the conversion is valid because all the other rules do not object either. | |||
====Example 2==== | |||
eweasel test: convert-to-current-type | |||
<code>[eiffel,N] | |||
class A[G] | |||
convert | |||
to_a: {A[STRING]} | |||
feature | |||
to_a: A[STRING] | |||
end | |||
</code> | |||
In the case where G's actual type parameter is a subtype of STRING the two types are conform again. | |||
The interesting rule is again '''VYCQ(3)''': | |||
Is A[ANY] conform to A[STRING]? | |||
This question is answered with '''no''' too. Therefore the conversion is valid. | |||
Revision as of 03:22, 19 January 2007
Warning: Warning: Article under development
Introduction
This article discusses issues recently discovered for the following two validity rules:
8.15.7 Validity: Conversion Procedure rule, Validity code: VYCP
8.15.8 Validity: Conversion Query rule, Validity code: VYCQ
Examples
For the following examples eweasel tests have been created. Their named
Example 1
eweasel test: convert-to-current-type
class A[G] convert to_a: {A[G]} feature to_a: A[G] end
The conversion to A[G] should indeed not be valid because they are conform.
The only rule that matters in our case is VYCQ(3).
What VYCQ(3) asks is the following
Is A[ANY] conform to A[G]?
As we answer this question clearly with no, the conversion is valid because all the other rules do not object either.
Example 2
eweasel test: convert-to-current-type
class A[G] convert to_a: {A[STRING]} feature to_a: A[STRING] end
In the case where G's actual type parameter is a subtype of STRING the two types are conform again.
The interesting rule is again VYCQ(3):
Is A[ANY] conform to A[STRING]?
This question is answered with no too. Therefore the conversion is valid.