Version 1.2 of ai05s/ai05-0120-1.txt

Unformatted version of ai05s/ai05-0120-1.txt version 1.2
Other versions for file ai05s/ai05-0120-1.txt

!standard 3.3(21) 08-11-18 AI05-0120-1/02
!standard 9.5.2(2)
!class binding interpretation 08-10-17
!status Amendment 201Z 08-11-26
!status ARG Approved 8-0-1 08-10-31
!status work item 08-10-17
!status received 08-08-06
!priority Low
!difficulty Easy
!qualifier Omission
!subject The current instance of a protected object is a constant view

!summary

The current instance of a protected object is a constant (view) within the body of a protected function.

!question

9.5.1(2) says, "Within the body of a protected function (or a function declared immediately within a protected_body), the current instance of the enclosing protected unit is defined to be a constant".

3.3(15) says, "The following (and no others) represent constants:" The current instance of the enclosing protected unit doesn't appear in the subsequent list. Should it be added? (Yes.)

!recommendation

(See Summary.)

!wording

Add after 3.3(21):

* Within the body of a protected function (or a function declared

immediately within a protected_body), the current instance of the enclosing protected unit;

!discussion

Since the list in 3.3 is supposed to represent all constants, it is wrong for this case to be left off of the list.

!corrigendum 3.3(21)

Insert after the paragraph:

the result of evaluated a function_call or an aggregate;
the new paragraph:
- within the body of a protected function (or a function declared immediately within a protected_body), the current instance of the enclosing protected unit;

!ACATS Test

The rule is tested in 9.5.1; this is just a redundant wording to be consistent, so no new tests are needed.

!appendix


!topic Contradictory rules? 
!reference 3.3(15-22), 9.5.1(2)
!from Adam Beneschan 08-08-06
!discussion


9.5.1(2) says, "Within the body of a protected function (or a function declared
immediately within a protected_body), the current instance of the enclosing
protected unit is defined to be a constant".

3.3(15) says, "The following (and no others) represent constants:"
The current instance of the enclosing protected unit doesn't appear in the subsequent list.

Is this a contradiction?

****************************************************************

From: Edmond Schonberg
Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2008  8:19 PM

Let's call it an omission... The list in 3.3(15) should have one more entry.
Maybe the wording in both cases should say "denote" rather than "represent" and
"defined to be" ?

****************************************************************

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent