CVS difference for ai12s/ai12-0124-1.txt

--- ai12s/ai12-0124-1.txt	2014/10/14 03:53:09	1.3
+++ ai12s/ai12-0124-1.txt	2014/11/15 03:31:04	1.4
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
-!standard 3.5(31/2)                                     14-10-03    AI12-0124-1/02
-!class Amendment 14-08-11
+!standard 3.5(55/3)                                     14-11-14    AI12-0124-1/03
+!class binding interpretation 14-10-19
+!status Corrigendum 2015 14-11-14
+!status ARG Approved 7-0-1  14-10-19
 !status work item 14-08-11
 !status received 14-08-08
 !priority Low
@@ -10,31 +12,32 @@
 
 Allow the prefix of the Image attribute to be an object.
 
-!problem
+!question
 
 GNAT has the attribute Obj'Img, which is very useful for debugging and testing
 as it does not require looking up the name of the subtype of Obj. This
-is commonly used in GNAT programs. Standard Ada should have something similar.
+is commonly used in GNAT programs. Should standard Ada should have something
+similar? (Yes.)
 
-!proposal
+!recommendation
 
 (See Wording.)
 
 !wording
 
-Add somewhere in 3.5: (Note that the attribute list doesn't appear to be in any
-obvious order, so perhaps these are best added at the tail end.)
+For a prefix X that denotes an object of a scalar type, the following
+attributes are defined: 
+X'Wide_Wide_Image
+         X'Wide_Wide_Image denotes the result of calling function
+         S'Wide_Wide_Image with /Arg/ being X, where S is the nominal
+         subtype of X.
+X'Wide_Image
+         X'Wide_Image denotes the result of calling function S'Image
+         with /Arg/ being X, where S is the nominal subtype of X.
 
-For a prefix X that denotes an object of a scalar type: 
-X'Image  Denotes the result of calling function S'Image on X, where S is the
-         nominal subtype of X.
-
-[Note: In the unlikely event that AI12-0123-1 was approved, this description
-could be simplified to:
-X'Image  Denotes the result of the subprogram call X'Subtype'Image(X).]
+X'Image  X'Image denotes the result of calling function S'Image with /Arg/
+         being X, where S is the nominal subtype of X.
 
-Similar wording is needed for X'Wide_Image and X'Wide_Wide_Image.
-
 !discussion
 
 We use an overloading of the existing attribute Image rather than following
@@ -56,6 +59,31 @@
 (Of course, in that case, the advantage of not having to know the subtype name
 has disappeared.)
 
+!corrigendum 3.5(55/3)
+
+@dinsa
+@xindent<For the evaluation of a call on S'Value for an enumeration subtype
+S, if the sequence of characters of the parameter (ignoring leading and
+trailing spaces) has the syntax of an enumeration literal and if it corresponds
+to a literal of the type of S (or corresponds to the result of S'Image for a
+value of the type), the result is the corresponding enumeration value;
+otherwise, Constraint_Error is raised. For a numeric subtype S, the evaluation
+of a call on S'Value with @i<Arg> of type String is equivalent to a call on
+S'Wide_Wide_Value for a corresponding @i<Arg> of type Wide_Wide_String.>
+@dinss
+For a @fa<prefix> X that denotes an object of a scalar type, the following
+attributes are defined: 
+@xhang<@xterm<X'Wide_Wide_Image>
+X'Wide_Wide_Image denotes the result of calling function
+S'Wide_Wide_Image with @i<Arg> being X, where S is the nominal
+subtype of X.>
+@xhang<@xterm<X'Wide_Image>
+X'Wide_Image denotes the result of calling function S'Wide_Image
+with @i<Arg> being X, where S is the nominal subtype of X.>
+@xhang<@xterm<X'Image>
+X'Image denotes the result of calling function S'Image with @i<Arg>
+being X, where S is the nominal subtype of X.>
+
 !ASIS
 
 No ASIS impact(??). (The attribute name already exists, so it is in the
@@ -68,6 +96,34 @@
 specified.
 
 !appendix
+
+From: Randy Brukardt
+Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014  8:38 PM
+
+At the meeting, we discussed where to put these new definitions in 3.5. The
+minutes say we decided:
+
+Put each after the matching subtype version. 
+
+Unfortunately, this makes no sense. The subtype attributes are all under a
+lead-in heading that says:
+
+For every scalar subtype S, the following attributes are defined: 
+
+(It's way up at 3.5(11), it's easy to miss given that there are more than 60
+paragraphs under that heading.)
+
+The new attributes will have to be under a heading:
+
+For a prefix X that denotes an object of a scalar type, the following
+attributes are defined: 
+
+We could of course duplicate the headings all over the place, but that doesn't
+make much sense. Thus, the only place to put these that makes sense is at the
+end of the existing list (after 3.5(55/3)).
+
+I'm just going to do that, but since I'm ignoring an explicit decision of the
+group, I wanted to put on the record why I did that.
 
 ****************************************************************