CVS difference for ai12s/ai12-0020-1.txt
--- ai12s/ai12-0020-1.txt 2018/01/27 04:54:50 1.3
+++ ai12s/ai12-0020-1.txt 2018/02/22 07:06:14 1.4
@@ -904,5 +904,62 @@
Aside: should the image of a null access value be "null" or "[00000000]" (if
hex) or "[ 0]" (if 'Image)??
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Jean-Pierre Rosen
+Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2018 1:28 AM
+
+> The only issue with that is that we don't have a hex image routine
+> anywhere. Integer_Address'Image is well-defined.
+
+If the (hex) image uses based notation, it can be fed back to 'Value
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Tucker Taft
+Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2018 11:29 AM
+
+> ...
+> Discriminated task types should display the discriminant values somehow.
+> Perhaps extension-aggregate-ish syntax? Something like
+>
+> (task <task id image> with D1 => This, D2 => that)
+>
+> and then, for consistency, undiscriminated image is
+>
+> (task <task id image>) .
+>
+> Or perhaps we drop the word "task", but then the parens look odd in
+> the undiscriminated task case. Do we drop them?
+
+I like the word "task" being there, and always using parentheses for composite
+types.
+
+> Nothing special for protected records.
+
+I would think you would have "(protected <id-of-some sort> with disc1 => X,
+disc2 => Y, comp1 => Z, ...)" to be consistent with tasks, and to make it
+clear that this is not your normal record.
+
+> Presumably Some_Protected_Object'Image behaves like a call to a
+> protected function with respect to locking.
+>
+>> Named-notation syntax is probably the way to go...
+>> If we do that, then we'd need consistent syntax
+>> for the null array case (single- and multi-dimensional).
+>
+> If we define syntax for null array aggregates, then we should use
+> whatever is agreed upon. Otherwise, how about
+>
+> "(1 .. 0 => <>)"
+>
+> "(1 .. 3 => (1 .. 0 => <>))"
+>
+> "(1 .. 0 => (1 .. 3 => <>))"
+> ? Or perhaps "()" instead of "<>".
+
+"<>" seems better than "()" given the general Ada allergy to empty parentheses.
+
****************************************************************
Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent