CVS difference for ai12s/ai12-0059-1.txt

--- ai12s/ai12-0059-1.txt	2016/04/22 03:41:42	1.12
+++ ai12s/ai12-0059-1.txt	2016/04/26 04:23:44	1.13
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-!standard 4.9.1(2/3)                              16-04-20    AI12-0059-1/09
+!standard 4.9.1(2/3)                              16-04-25    AI12-0059-1/10
 !standard 13.1(14)
 !standard 13.1(23)
 !standard 13.3(9/3)
@@ -111,13 +111,15 @@
 
 Add the following after 13.1(14.a/3):
 
-   AARM Reason: The above existing static matching rule combined
-   with the updated definition of static matching in 4.9.1(2)
-   does not cause incompatibilities in existing Ada code that does not
-   mention Object_Size. Note that 13.1(14) applies even to the
-   implementation-defined value of Object_Size when it is not specified.
+   AARM Reason: The above static matching rule combined with the definition
+   of static matching in 4.9.1 (after updating to add Object_Size)
+   does not cause incompatibilities in existing Ada 2012 code that does not
+   mention Object_Size. But it does constrain the implementation-defined value
+   of Object_Size when it is not specified for a subtype; the above rule
+   applies even in that case. (The effects noted in the example above would
+   occur otherwise.) 
 
-   AARM Discussion: We need this rule even though static matching explicitly
+   We need this rule even though static matching explicitly
    excludes confirming values of Object_Size. That's because a general access
    type can designate any aliased object whose subtype statically matches the
    the designated subtype. Since the Object_Size of a subtype determines the
@@ -125,6 +127,7 @@
    allowed different Object_Sizes for statically matching subtypes, we'd be
    allowing the access type to designate objects with differing numbers of
    bits. That isn't going to work.
+   End AARM Reason.
 
 Add Object_Size to 13.1(23):