CVS difference for ai05s/ai05-0073-1.txt

Differences between 1.3 and version 1.4
Log of other versions for file ai05s/ai05-0073-1.txt

--- ai05s/ai05-0073-1.txt	2007/12/13 04:39:38	1.3
+++ ai05s/ai05-0073-1.txt	2008/05/10 05:14:33	1.4
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-!standard 3.9.3(8)                                            07-12-03    AI05-0073-1/03
+!standard 3.9.3(8)                                            08-04-18    AI05-0073-1/04
 !standard 3.9.3(10)
 !standard 6.5(8/2)
 !class binding interpretation 07-10-24
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
       type T (<>) is abstract tagged private;
    function Gft (X : T) return T;
 
-This appears to be legal, because a generic function is not a function and 3.9.3(8/2) only
+This appears to be legal, because a generic function is not a function and 3.9.3(8) only
 talks about functions. Moreover, it is possible to write a body for this generic by using
 an abstract formal subprogram. But it is not useful.
 
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@
      function Ft (X : T) return T;
    end GP;
 
-Is illegal because it violates 3.9.3(8/2). Should the generic function also be illegal? (Yes.)
+Is illegal because it violates 3.9.3(8). Should the generic function also be illegal? (Yes.)
 
 (2) Consider:
     package Pkg is
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@
 to return a result designating an object with a different type. For instance, if we have:
 
      function Empty return access Set;
-     function Union(S1, S2 : access Set) return Access Set;
+     function Union(S1, S2 : access Set) return access Set;
      procedure Assign(S1, S2 : access Set);
         ...
      Assign(X'Access, Union(Empty, Y'Access));
@@ -282,7 +282,7 @@
 
 ****************************************************************
 
-From: Randy Brukardt
+From: Tucker Taft
 Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2007  3:59 PM
 
 I think it should be illegal, because inside the generic

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent