CVS difference for ai05s/ai05-0026-1.txt

Differences between 1.3 and version 1.4
Log of other versions for file ai05s/ai05-0026-1.txt

--- ai05s/ai05-0026-1.txt	2007/12/13 04:39:35	1.3
+++ ai05s/ai05-0026-1.txt	2008/05/10 05:14:33	1.4
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-!standard 7.6(9.4/2)                                   07-11-20    AI05-0026-1/03
+!standard 7.6(9.4/2)                                   08-04-09    AI05-0026-1/04
 !standard B.3.3(9/2)
 !standard B.3.3(10/2)
 !class binding interpretation 06-11-13
@@ -11,7 +11,8 @@
 !subject Missing rules for Unchecked_Unions
-A variant component type of an Unchecked_Union type shall not need finalization.
+A variant component of an Unchecked_Union type cannot have a type that
+needs finalization.
@@ -74,6 +75,10 @@
 section, privacy is respected by default; if we want to ignore privacy,
 then this must be stated explicitly.
+The addition to B.3.3(9/2) is in response to the second part of the
+question; a component_clause can only be used as part of a
 It is intended that the new 10/2 formulation be equivalent (for purposes of
 Legality Checking of Unchecked_Union pragmas) to changing the definition
 of "needs finalization" to conservatively assume within a generic body
@@ -85,7 +90,7 @@
 No_Nested_Finalization restriction checking is a post-compilation check while
 legality checking for an Unchecked_Union pragma is not.
-B.3.3(7/2)'s requirement that "All component subtypes of an unchecked union
+The requirement of B.3.3(7/2) that "All component subtypes of an unchecked union
 type shall be C-compatible" typically eliminates 99% of the problems in this
 area anyway, but we don't want to rely on that.
@@ -122,16 +127,6 @@
 The pragma should be rejected even if the implementation is willing
 to permit I1.T as a C-compatible type (using the freedom granted by B.1(20)).
-1)  The wording "or within the body of any of its descendant library units"
-    follows the wording of 3.9.1(4/2). Alternatively, 4.8(5.3/2) uses
-    "or within a body declared within the declarative region of [the] generic
-    unit". Is one preferable to the other in this case?
-    Incidentally, it appears that 10.2.1(10.1/2) has problems in this area and
-    doesn't handle nested generics or generic child units very well.
 !corrigendum 7.6(9.4/2)

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent