Version 1.4 of ai05s/ai05-0120-1.txt

Unformatted version of ai05s/ai05-0120-1.txt version 1.4
Other versions for file ai05s/ai05-0120-1.txt

!standard 3.3(21) 09-05-30 AI05-0120-1/03
!class binding interpretation 08-10-17
!status Amendment 201Z 08-11-26
!status WG9 Approved 09-06-12
!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 the list.

!corrigendum 3.3(21)

Insert after the paragraph:

the result of evaluating 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