CVS difference for ai05s/ai05-0004-1.txt

--- ai05s/ai05-0004-1.txt	2007/09/13 02:20:42	1.11
+++ ai05s/ai05-0004-1.txt	2007/12/13 04:39:33	1.12
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
-!standard C.7.1(17/2)                               07-09-05  AI05-0004-1/08
+!standard C.7.1(17/2)                               07-11-19  AI05-0004-1/09
+!standard 1.1.2(21)
 !standard 1.1.4(14.1/2)
 !standard 3.8(11)
 !standard 3.8(13.1/2)
@@ -75,6 +76,9 @@
 20) Assignment operations are now defined for limited types, so 7.6(16) and 7.6(18)
 should not have parenthetical references to "nonlimited".
 
+21) The title of Annex M has changed, so the reference to it in 1.1.2(21) should be to
+"Summary of Documentation Requirements". 
+
 !question
 
 1) Does C.7.1(17/2) apply to calls to Current_Task in an entry barrier? (Yes.)
@@ -132,7 +136,7 @@
 should be "Cur_Count"? (Yes.)
 
 15) A.18.7(58/2) is defining the meaning of Intersection, so why does the text
-refer to Union? (It should say Union.)
+refer to Union? (It should say Intersection.)
 
 16) A.18.7(79/2) seems to be misplaced; it follows the paragraph that describes
 procedure Next. On the other hand, the function Contains, declared in A.18.7(82/2),
@@ -143,17 +147,21 @@
 there any good reason that (implementation-defined) operational items should be
 excluded here? (No.)
 
-18) 7.4(10) defines the elaboration of a deferred constant declaration by lists the
+18) 7.4(10) defines the elaboration of a deferred constant declaration by listing the
 kinds of types that can occur there, but it does not list (anonymous) access_definition.
 One presumes that it too should be elaborated here.
 
 19) The mode of Person in Remove_First in 3.9.4(29/2) does not match that of the
 interface that it is derived from. Is that correct? (No.)
 
-20) The assignment operation is defined by for all types in the Amendment. But 7.6(16)
+20) The assignment operation is defined for all types in the Amendment. But 7.6(16)
 and 7.6(18) have parenthetical remarks suggesting that they apply only to nonlimited
 types. Should that be corrected? (Yes.)
 
+21) 1.1.2(21) refers to Annex M as "Implementation-Defined Characteristics", but the
+Amendment changed the name to "Summary of Documentation Requirements". Should this be
+corrected? (Yes.)
+
 [Other questions here.]
 
 !recommendation
@@ -201,13 +209,15 @@
 19) 3.9.4(29/2) should be changed as follows:
   "procedure Remove_First (Q : in out Fast_Food_Queue; Person : {out}[in] Person_Name);"
 
-2)) The first sentence of 7.6(16) should be modified:
+20) The first sentence of 7.6(16) should be modified:
   To adjust the value of a [(nonlimited)] composite object, the values of the components
   of the object are first adjusted in an arbitrary order, and then, if the object is
   {nonlimited} controlled, Adjust is called.
 
 "nonlimited" should be deleted from 7.6(18).
 
+21) 1.1.2(21) should say Annex M, "Summary of Documentation Requirements".
+
 !discussion
 
 1) entry_barrier is syntactically within entry_body. C.7.1(17/2) however, says
@@ -256,7 +266,7 @@
 
 12) "exponent" refers to the syntax defined in 2.4.1, and should be in the syntax font.
 
-Many of these corrections were made in the Ada Europe edition
+Many of the first twelve corrections were made in the Ada Europe (printed) edition
 of the consolidated reference manual. The original versions were producing linking
 errors in the HTML versions (which link syntax terms to their definitions).
 But the error is present in the 'official' documents: the final version of the Ada 95 RM,
@@ -274,8 +284,8 @@
 not in the Amendment.
 
 17) This appears to be a change missed during the corrigendum work. It would be
-weirdly inconsistent not to allow operation items here. Note that there aren't
-any language-defined operation items that could be used here, so this change really
+weirdly inconsistent not to allow operational items here. Note that there aren't
+any language-defined operational items that could be used here, so this change really
 only applies to implementation-defined items (as well as future ones).
 
 18) This appears to be a change missed by the Amendment work. Obviously, all kinds of
@@ -292,6 +302,17 @@
 In addition, 7.6(16) should say that Adjust is called only for nonlimited controlled types,
 so that the canonical semantics (before the build-in-place requirement of 7.6(17.1/2)
 is applied) is well-defined.
+
+21) The Ada Europe version (both on-line and printed), incorrectly references clause M.2 in
+this paragraph, because the old Annex title was used for that clause (and the tools thus
+used it for the cross-reference). Obviously, we want to use the correct title.
+
+!corrigendum 1.1.2(12)
+
+@drepl
+Annex M, "Implementation-Defined Characteristics"
+@dby
+Annex M, "Summary of Documentation Requirements"
 
 !corrigendum 1.1.4(14.1/2)