CVS difference for ai12s/ai12-0322-1.txt
--- ai12s/ai12-0322-1.txt 2019/03/08 06:20:23 1.2
+++ ai12s/ai12-0322-1.txt 2019/03/09 05:05:39 1.3
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
-!standard 4.9(15) 19-03-08 AI12-0322-1/02
+!standard 4.9(15) 19-03-09 AI12-0322-1/03
+!standard 5.2.1(4/5)
!standard 5.2.1(5/5)
!class Amendment 19-03-07
!status work item 19-03-07
@@ -38,6 +39,15 @@
formally given in 3.3[; the nominal subtype follows from the equivalence
given below in Static Semantics].
+Modify 5.2.1(4/5):
+
+ A target_name shall [only] appear {only} in the expression of an
+ assignment_statement.
+
+ [Editor's note: Bob suggested this small rewording. Since the original AI
+ is WG9-approved, the change has to go in *some* AI, and this one was handy
+ and relevant.]
+
Replace 5.2.1 (5/5) with:
Dynamic Semantics
@@ -667,7 +677,7 @@
***************************************************************
-From: Tucker Taft
+From: Randy Brukardt
Sent: Friday, March 8, 2019 12:04 AM
...
@@ -739,6 +749,36 @@
Well, I wrote the note when I created the AI a few hours ago. We can decide on
Monday what to do with it.
+
+***************************************************************
+
+From: Tucker Taft
+Sent: Friday, March 8, 2019 8:18 AM
+
+> ...
+>
+>> Erroneous is erroneous!
+>
+> As I show above, not necessarily. :-) Maybe not a significant
+> difference, but the ordering in Janus/Ada has definitely helped
+> debugging by preventing this sort of erroneousness.
+
+All good points.
+
+>>> Although really that a problem
+>>> with assignment statements as a whole -- they truly need such a note.
+>>> (A cross-reference to 3.7.2(4) would be a big help, as it seems
+>>> impossible to find that rule when it comes up in discussion. I would
+>>> *never* have looked in 3.7.2, as the title of the clause says that
+>>> it defines some attributes.)
+>>
+>> I could agree that assignment statements need such a note, but I
+>> don't think a target_name makes things worse.
+>
+> Well, I wrote the note when I created the AI a few hours ago. We can
+> decide on Monday what to do with it.
+
+Sounds good.
***************************************************************
Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent