Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!rice!titan!preston
From: preston@titan.rice.edu (Preston Briggs)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2
Subject: Re: Structural Type Equivalence in Modula-3: Why?
Message-ID: <5734@brazos.Rice.edu>
Date: 13 Mar 90 17:20:47 GMT
References: <3508@caesar.cs.montana.edu>
Sender: root@rice.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rice University, Houston
Lines: 15

In article <3508@caesar.cs.montana.edu> icsu8209@caesar.cs.montana.edu (Glassy) writes:
>Page 2, Sect. 2, Par. 1 Line 1 of "Modula-3 Report (revised)" by
>Cardelli, Donahue et al indicates Modula-3 uses structural type
>equivalence, instead of name type equivalence used in Modula-2.

Besides Chase's comments in another article, there's a paper
expanding on some of the rationale

	The Modula-3 type system
	Cardelli, Donahue, Jordan, Kalsow, Nelson
	POPL 16, 1989

--
Preston Briggs				looking for the great leap forward
preston@titan.rice.edu