CVS difference for acs/ac-00231.txt

Differences between 1.1 and version 1.2
Log of other versions for file acs/ac-00231.txt

--- acs/ac-00231.txt	2012/05/01 23:54:19	1.1
+++ acs/ac-00231.txt	2012/05/03 02:43:03	1.2
@@ -416,12 +416,84 @@
 
 ***************************************************************
 
+From: Robert Dewar
+Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012  12:45 PM
+
+I think this is definitely too late for Ada 2012, as has been pointed out, there
+are some subtleties here, and it may be harder than it looks to allow this
+without unintended consequences. So this should be for Ada 2020.
+
+***************************************************************
+
+From: Jeff Cousins
+Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012  12:34 PM
+
+Could we have an Ada 2012 AI on this, please?  It seems anomalous to allow
+A'Range as a shorthand for A'First .. A'Last in most places but not for integer
+type declarations.
+
+***************************************************************
+
+From: Robert Dewar
+Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012  12:45 PM
+
+I think this is definitely too late for Ada 2012, as has been pointed out, there
+are some subtleties here, and it may be harder than it looks to allow this
+without unintended consequences. So this should be for Ada 2020.
+
+***************************************************************
+
+From: Jeff Cousins
+Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012  9:32 AM
+
+That's what I meant by an Ada 2012 AI rather than an Ada 2005 AI - one on Ada
+2012 for consideration for Ada 2012.
+
+***************************************************************
+
+From: Robert Dewar
+Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012  10:14 AM
+
+And I am saying it is too late for Ada 2012, which at this stage is essentially
+complete as of the Florida meeting, with no more substantive changes expected.
+This is a substantive change that should be considered for the next version, but
+not Ada 2012.
+
+***************************************************************
+
+From: Tucker Taft
+Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012  11:02 AM
+
+I am pretty sure Jeff meant to write "on Ada2012 for consideration for Ada2020."
+
+***************************************************************
+
+From: Robert Dewar
+Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012  11:23 AM
+
+Ah yes, that makes sense :-)
+
+***************************************************************
+
+From: Jeff Cousins
+Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012  8:59 AM
+
+Yes, that's what my brain had thought it had told my fingers but I must have
+been too tired to succeed!
+
+***************************************************************
+
 Editor's Note: This topic was tabled for lack of support.
 
 Note that no one has ever shown a realistic example where this
 would be a remotely useful idea (the example Jeff showed being illegal because
 the type would be wrong; a subtype needs to be used in that context and
 would be needed in similar contexts).
+
+It's also true that this design dates to Ada 83 and has never been changed.
+If there was a real problem, it would have showed up in the Ada 9x comments,
+the Ada 200x comments, or somewhere else. No one has said that they've
+definitely run into this in practice.
 
 In addition, there is no "equivalence" here, as the expr .. expr of an
 integer type declaration is *not* a range; the expressions have special

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent