CVS difference for ai12s/ai12-0312-1.txt

Differences between 1.2 and version 1.3
Log of other versions for file ai12s/ai12-0312-1.txt

--- ai12s/ai12-0312-1.txt	2019/02/23 03:35:06	1.2
+++ ai12s/ai12-0312-1.txt	2019/03/06 02:22:35	1.3
@@ -310,3 +310,136 @@
 "case type expression"! :-)
 
 ****************************************************************
+
+From: Brad Moore
+Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019  10:23 PM
+
+>> I managed to get an initial draft of this AI, possibly just under or 
+>> over the deadline.
+> 
+> This message was time-stamped at 5:45 CST, so you were 45 minutes 
+> late. As always, I ask that people that might be late send me a 
+> heads-up. It didn't matter today, as processing the draft of the hour 
+> for AI12-0191-1 took forever.
+
+Whew! Glad to hear it made it under the door even if only by luck....
+
+...
+>>     function To_Date (Value : String) return Date is
+>>       (declare
+>>            Integer_String : constant String := Integer'Image
+> (Integer'Value (Value));
+>>         begin
+>>           (Day => Integer'Value(Integer_String (Integer_String'Last-5 ..
+> Integer_String'Last-4)),
+>>            Year => Integer'Value (Integer_String (Integer_String'Last 
+>> - 3
+> .. Integer_String'Last)),
+>>            Month => Month_Name'Val (Integer'Value(Integer_String
+> (Integer_String'First .. Integer_String'Last - 6))-1)));
+> 
+> Some of these lines are too long to put in the RM as-is. It would help 
+> to break them to be shorter, so I don't have to guess where to do it. 
+
+I found it helped to shorten some of the variable names. Here is what I have currently.
+
+   function To_Date (Value : String) return Date is
+     declare S : constant String := Integer'Image (Integer'Value (Value)); begin
+       (Day => Integer'Value (S (S'Last-5 .. S'Last-4)),
+        Year => Integer'Value (S (S'Last-3 .. S'Last)),
+        Month => Month_Name'Val (Integer'Value (S (S'First .. S'Last-6))-1));
+
+One question. I wasn't sure if I need an extra set of parens around the 
+expression function, or can the parens used for the aggregate object suffice? 
+If not, you'll need to add those.
+
+Also not sure if style here warrants putting the declare and begin on the same 
+line, but I quite like the new look of this example. 
+
+>>!wording
+>>
+>>delete paragraphs 4.3.5 (86/5 - 86/5)       [Already show example of empty
+> container aggregate]
+> 
+> You have a range with one paragraph in it; I suspect that you meant
+> something else.
+
+I meant (86/5 - 87/5)
+
+>>Append after 4.5.7 (21/3)
+> ...
+>>Value : constant Natural := (case
+>>type Roman_Digit is ('I', 'V', 'X', 'L', 'C', 'D', 'M');
+> 
+> There is something wrong with this! I haven't previously encountered the
+> "case type expression"! :-)
+
+These two lines are garbage and should be deleted....
+
+"Value : constant Natural := (case 
+type Roman_Digit is ('I', 'V', 'X', 'L', 'C', 'D', 'M');"
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Randy Brukardt
+Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019  10:59 PM
+
+...
+> Whew! Glad to hear it made it under the door even if only by luck....
+
+...but not with this message. :-)
+
+...
+> > Some of these lines are too long to put in the RM as-is. It would 
+> > help to break them to be shorter, so I don't have to guess where to do it.
+> > 
+> 
+> I found it helped to shorten some of the variable names. Here is what 
+> I have currently.
+> 
+>    function To_Date (Value : String) return Date is
+>      declare S : constant String := Integer'Image (Integer'Value 
+> (Value));
+begin
+>        (Day => Integer'Value (S (S'Last-5 .. S'Last-4)),
+>         Year => Integer'Value (S (S'Last-3 .. S'Last)),
+>         Month => Month_Name'Val (Integer'Value (S (S'First ..
+S'Last-6))-1));
+> 
+> One question. I wasn't sure if I need an extra set of parens around 
+> the expression function, or can the parens used for the aggregate 
+> object suffice? If not, you'll need to add those.
+
+This example doesn't have any parens at all (needed around the declare 
+expression), so that's a problem. And putting the declare/declaration/begin 
+on the same line isn't the recommended style, and it's probably too long 
+anyway (only room for roughly 70 characters on a line in an example, 
+including the indenting white space), so let's not do that.
+
+> Also not sure if style here warrants putting the declare and begin on 
+> the same line, but I quite like the new look of this example.
+
+See above.
+ 
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Jeff Cousins
+Sent: Monday, February 22, 2019  2:27 PM
+
+Presumably "delete paragraphs (86/5  86/5)" should be "Delete paragraphs (86/5  87/5)".
+
+"Add after 5.5 (23/5)" It would help to begin with a comment of explanation, 
+e.g. that it is an example of explicit chunk definition.
+
+"Append after 11.3 (7)" I can only see one example in 13.13.1; if so, this 
+should be in singular.
+
+"Append after B.3 (78/3)" It would help to begin with a comment of explanation, 
+e.g. that it is an example of a variadic C function.
+
+"Append after 4.5.7 (21/3)" Is the last line simply spurious, partly cut and 
+pasted from 3.5.2?
+
+Also, could all these be put in RM order?
+
+****************************************************************

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent