[Oberon] Type compatibility in Oberon

[Chris Burrows]

Not exactly. This amended statement is more accurate:

"It is not guaranteed that a program THAT USES UNDEFINED FEATURES compiled
with two different implementations of the same report behave in the same
way."

I find that neither surprising nor anything to be concerned about. I
sincerely hope that an Oberon programmer would not assume otherwise.

Regards,
Chris Burrows
CFB Software
https://www.astrobe.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oberon [mailto:oberon-bounces at lists.inf.ethz.ch] On Behalf Of
> Andreas Pirklbauer
> Sent: Friday, 1 May 2020 6:36 PM
> To: Oberon List
> Subject: [Oberon] Type compatibility in Oberon
> 
>    > Oberon as it is defined in the report leaves some parts needed for
> low level programming to the implementation.
> 
> At the heart the problem appears to be two-fold: a) the language leaves
> certain things undefined, and b) in order to truly implement an entire
> system like the Oberon system, one has to cheat (at least a little). For
> example, today it is not guaranteed that a program compiled with two
> different implementations of the same report behave in the same way.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Oberon at lists.inf.ethz.ch mailing list for ETH Oberon and related systems
> https://lists.inf.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/oberon