Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: > The list of constraints in section 3.6.3 is not quite right. > > Two fields in two legs having the same name must not only have the same > bit position. They must have the same TYPE! > > I suspect this error is present in the implementation as well (?)
True. I have fixed this problem in the specification and in the implementation. Currently, the values in the discriminating values (for fields within the where clause) must be integer literals. Consequently, the discriminating fields must be of integer/bitfield type. I have noted this restriction also in the spec. It is conceivable that this rule will be relaxed include to all literals. Thanks, Swaroop. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
