CVS difference for ais/ai-00117.txt

Differences between 1.2 and version 1.3
Log of other versions for file ais/ai-00117.txt

--- ais/ai-00117.txt	1999/03/04 20:41:37	1.2
+++ ais/ai-00117.txt	1999/04/01 20:08:36	1.3
@@ -1,12 +1,13 @@
-!standard 03.09.02 (10)                               99-02-06  AI95-00117/03
+!standard 03.09.02 (10)                               99-04-01  AI95-00117/04
 !class binding interpretation 96-04-04
+!status ARG Approved (with changes) 7-1-1  99-03-24
 !status work item 96-04-04
 !status received 96-04-04
 !priority High
 !difficulty Hard
 !subject Calling Conventions
 
-!summary 99-02-06
+!summary
 
 Unless specified otherwise in the RM, the default convention of any
 entity is Ada.
@@ -25,7 +26,7 @@
 Intrinsic.  An implicitly declared dispatching "/=" operator with
 boolean result has convention Intrinsic, and this is legal.
 
-!question 96-11-18
+!question
 
 6.3.1 defines the default convention of various entities (that is, the
 convention in the absence of a convention-specifying pragma):
@@ -120,11 +121,11 @@
 declaration of "=" of a tagged type is an illegal dispatching operation.
 Is this the intent?  (No.)
 
-!recommendation 96-04-04
+!recommendation
 
 (See summary.)
 
-!wording 99-02-06
+!wording
 
 Add two bullets after 6.3.1(13):
 "If not listed above, the calling convention for any inherited
@@ -147,12 +148,8 @@
 dispatching operation shall not have convention Intrinsic."
 
 
-!discussion 99-02-05
+!discussion
 
-Note: This AI subsumes AI95-00065.
-
-- ----------------
-
 1. The default convention ought to be Ada for any entity not covered by
 6.3.1.  The dispatching operations of a type ought to inherit the
 convention of the type, for convenient interfacing to other OOP
@@ -320,10 +317,10 @@
 The wording change to 3.9.2(10) shown above means that it's OK to have
 such an inherited subprogram.  If the spec of G contained a type
 extension of Formal, then that type's inherited Proc would also have
-convention Intrinsic, which would be legal.  An explicit overriding of
-that Proc would be illegal.
+convention Intrinsic, which would be legal. However, an explicit
+overriding of that Proc would be illegal.
 
-!appendix 97-03-19
+!appendix
 
 !section 3.9.2(1)
 !subject Implicit /= is a legal dispatching operation

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent