CVS difference for acs/ac-00175.txt

Differences between 1.1 and version 1.2
Log of other versions for file acs/ac-00175.txt

--- acs/ac-00175.txt	2009/06/02 01:21:34	1.1
+++ acs/ac-00175.txt	2009/06/09 05:23:43	1.2
@@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
 !from Adam Beneschan 09-03-09
 !discussion
 
-My apologies if this is a dumb question; I really haven't looked very closely into synchronized interfaces and things like that yet.  So I could easily be missing something.  But: What rule makes the following code illegal?
+My apologies if this is a dumb question; I really haven't looked very closely
+into synchronized interfaces and things like that yet.  So I could easily be
+missing something.  But: What rule makes the following code illegal?
 
     package Pack1 is
         type Int is limited interface;
@@ -40,7 +42,13 @@
     end Pack3;
 
 
-3.9(2/2) says that that a task type derived from an interface type is a tagged type.  12.5.1(17/2) says that for a formal "tagged limited private" type, the category for the formal is the category of all tagged types; Task_Type is tagged by 3.9(2), and I 
don't see any other rules in 12.5.1 that would make Task_Type an illegal actual for the formal T.  But the result is a type extension being derived from a task type in the instance body, which is disallowed by 3.9.1(3/2).
+3.9(2/2) says that that a task type derived from an interface type is a tagged
+type.  12.5.1(17/2) says that for a formal "tagged limited private" type, the
+category for the formal is the category of all tagged types; Task_Type is tagged
+by 3.9(2), and I don't see any other rules in 12.5.1 that would make Task_Type
+an illegal actual for the formal T.  But the result is a type extension being
+derived from a task type in the instance body, which is disallowed by
+3.9.1(3/2).
 
 Contract model violation?
 

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent