CVS difference for ais/ai-00004.txt
--- ais/ai-00004.txt 1999/08/31 22:53:53 1.3
+++ ais/ai-00004.txt 2000/07/13 04:31:26 1.4
@@ -33,10 +33,10 @@
for a generic formal access type;
This seems to imply that a remote access type has no storage pool, which
-is confirmed by AARM-E.2.2(17.a):
+is confirmed by AARM E.2.2(17.a):
- 17.a Reason: All three of these restrictions are because there is no
- storage pool associated with a remote access-to-class-wide type.
+ Reason: All three of these restrictions are because there is no
+ storage pool associated with a remote access-to-class-wide type.
However, E.2.2(17) allows allocators for types derived from remote
access types. How can an allocator work for a type that has no storage
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@
!discussion
Normally, a derived access type has the same storage pool as its parent.
-See AI95-00062, which confirms NOTE 3.4(31). However, the intent of
+See 8652/0012 (AI-00062), which confirms NOTE 3.4(31). However, the intent of
E.2.2(17) is that a remote access type has no storage pool. Therefore,
a type derived from a remote access type cannot have a storage pool,
either. Querying 'Storage_Pool and 'Storage_Size should be illegal by
Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent