[m-rev.] for review: documentation for pragma foreign_type

[Tyson Dowd]

[Accidently sent this in personal mail, don't know how..., it should
have gone to the list...]

> The description of the semantics sounds wrong to me.  I thought we agreed
> that we should require a Mercury declaration of the type,
> 
> 	:- type @var{MercuryTypeName}.
> 
> and that the `pragma foreign_type' declaration did not declare a new
> type (as the documentation above states), but instead just gave some
> details about how that type was implemented.

Yes, this is true.

I have been putting this off, I need to look into this some more. 

If we follow this path then perhaps we should make sure the pragma only
occurs in the implementation section.  But will this have other
consequences?  I don't think so but I haven't tried it yet.
 
> When you say that "only classes are supported", what does this exclude?

Should say reference classes.

> Does it work for value classes?

No.

> 
> The explanation there refers to both the "IL backend" and the
> ".NET backend".  What's the difference?

I say .NET backend, Pete says IL backend...
I say tomato, he says tomaat...

Should say .NET backend.


Other comments were helpful too, I will work on them.

-- 
       Tyson Dowd           # 
                            #  Surreal humour isn't everyone's cup of fur.
     trd at cs.mu.oz.au        # 
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~trd #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------