CVS difference for ai05s/ai05-0061-1.txt
--- ai05s/ai05-0061-1.txt 2007/08/07 01:16:17 1.1
+++ ai05s/ai05-0061-1.txt 2007/10/09 19:27:15 1.2
@@ -103,6 +103,21 @@
partial view when checking rules in a generic body, rather than make specific fixes
all over the Standard.
+A related issue is whether generic formal types are "known to be constrained" when they
+are designated by a dereference of a pool-specific access type. Whether or not
+an allocated object is unconstrained or constrained by its initial value would appear
+to be determined by the actual. Thus, we have the contract problem described in the
+question. But it seems to be a general question that would apply anywhere that the
+"known to be constrained" rule is used (for instance, in renaming).
+It's not even clear that the properties of the actual should be used. That's typical
+for dyanmic semantics, but the allocation rule is defined as static semantics.
+Note that the resolution of the allocation issue matters in the implementation of the
+containers libraries, where we have a special permission for unconstrained element types
+to have constrained element objects. But if such allocated objects are actually
+unconstrained, we don't need that permission. A tangled web we weave...
Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent