CVS difference for ai12s/ai12-0187-1.txt

Differences between 1.8 and version 1.9
Log of other versions for file ai12s/ai12-0187-1.txt

--- ai12s/ai12-0187-1.txt	2017/11/22 04:31:18	1.8
+++ ai12s/ai12-0187-1.txt	2017/11/30 04:18:02	1.9
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
-!standard 7.3.3(0)                                    17-10-14  AI12-0187-1/05
+!standard 7.3.3(0)                                    17-11-21  AI12-0187-1/06
 !standard 13.1.1(4/3)
 !class Amendment 16-06-02
+!status Amendment 1-2012 17-11-21
+!status ARG Approved 5-0-3  17-10-14
 !status work item 16-06-02
 !status received 16-06-02
 !priority Medium
@@ -68,7 +70,7 @@
 is not very useful as a stand-alone aspect (it makes more sense to just modify
 the postcondition in that case).
 
-The aspect determines a list of property functions for each primitive
+The aspect determines a list of stable property functions for each primitive
 subprogram. The postcondition(s) of the subprogram are modified with an
 item that verifies that the property is unchanged for each parameter of
 the appropriate type, unless that property is already referenced in the
@@ -345,8 +347,7 @@
 initial ARG response was that "stable properties" seemed like an appropriate
 description. Thus we're sticking with that term.
 
-(8) The real key to this feature is how well this works in practice, for
-packages like the containers. It will be used in AI12-0112-1, so we should
+(8) This feature will be used in AI12-0112-1 for the containers, so we will
 have some fully worked out examples.
 
 (9) I didn't make any attempt to modify the wording in 6.1.1 to mention that
@@ -354,13 +355,13 @@
 modified to add some stable property expressions. In general, we want to use
 the same rules for all evaluations of a class-wide postcondition, including
 any added parts. However, it would appear that this might cause failures of
-the Legality Rules 6.1.1(10/3-17/3). I believe that the wording is sufficient
-as I have presented it here, but it is hard to be sure.
+the Legality Rules 6.1.1(10/3-17/3). I believe that the current wording is
+sufficient.
 
 
 !example
 
-Using this feature, Text_IO could be written something like:
+Using this feature, Ada.Text_IO could be written something like:
 
     package Ada.Text_IO is
        type File_Type is private

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent