🚀 go-pugleaf

On page 3-15, section 3.5.4, the ARM says:

A type declaration of the form:

    type T is range L .. R;

is, by definition equivalent to the following declarations:

    type <integer_type> is new predefined_integer_type;
    subtype T is <integer_type> range <integer_type>(L) .. <integer_type>(R);

It then goes on to refer to T as a _type_ :
"The elaboration of the declaration of an integer _type_ ...".
However, the "equivalent" pair of declarations given does
_not_ declare a new type named T, is declares an anonymous
type (integer_type) and a _subtype_ T.

Are they lying, or are they just careless?