CVS difference for ais/ai-00135.txt

Differences between 1.4 and version 1.5
Log of other versions for file ais/ai-00135.txt

--- ais/ai-00135.txt	1999/10/08 23:41:05	1.4
+++ ais/ai-00135.txt	2000/04/14 01:45:07	1.5
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-!standard 08.05.04 (05)                               99-08-31  AI95-00135/03
+!standard 08.05.04 (05)                               00-04-11  AI95-00135/04
 !standard 08.05.04 (08)
 !class binding interpretation 96-05-07
 !status Corrigendum 2000 99-08-13
@@ -131,8 +131,9 @@
 before the subprogram it declares is frozen, the subprogram it declares takes
 its convention from the renamed subprogram; otherwise the convention of the
 renamed subprogram shall not be Intrinsic. A renaming-as-body is illegal if the
-declaration occurs before the subprogram is frozen, and the renaming renames
-the subprogram itself, either directly or indirectly.
+declaration occurs before the subprogram whose declaration it completes is
+frozen, and the renaming renames the subprogram itself, through one or more
+subprogram renaming declarations, none of whose subprograms has been frozen.
 
 !corrigendum 8.05.04(8)
 
@@ -147,7 +148,7 @@
 
 If a subprogram directly or indirectly renames itself, then it is a bounded
 error to call that subprogram. Possible consequences are that Program_Error
-or Storage_Error is raised, or that the call results in an indefinite loop.
+or Storage_Error is raised, or that the call results in infinite recursion.
 
 !ACATS test
 
@@ -261,5 +262,68 @@
 agreed that this was bad.
 
 The wording was tabled.
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Randy Brukardt
+Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 6:20 PM
+
+The wording we hashed out at the meeting for AI-00135 (the infamous
+renames-as-body AI) was:
+
+A renaming-as-body is illegal if the declaration occurs before the
+subprogram it declares is frozen, and the renaming renames the subprogram
+itself through one or more subprogram renaming declarations, none of whose
+subprograms has been frozen.
+
+
+I'm updating the TC, and it strikes me that there is something wrong with
+this. A renaming-as-body is a completion, not a declaration, so it doesn't
+"declare" a subprogram. Shouldn't the wording be "...before the subprogram
+it completes is frozen..."?
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Gary Dismukes
+Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 6:31 PM
+
+I agree, the proposed wording is wrong and your suggested rewording
+sounds reasonable.
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Tucker Taft
+Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 7:56 AM
+
+You don't "complete" an entity, you "complete" a declaration.
+Hence, probably better would be something like "... before the
+freezing of the subprogram whose declaration it completes.
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Gary Dismukes
+Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 12:15 PM
+
+OK, but note that 3.11.1(1) says
+
+  "The second part is called the completion of the declaration
+   (and of the entity declared), ..."
+
+So it seems okay to talk about completion of entities.  If we
+want to be really pedantic we shouldn't even use the verb
+'complete', but only the noun 'completion', since 'complete'
+isn't a technical term as far as I can see :-)
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Erhard Ploedereder
+Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 10:40 AM
+
+> I'm updating the TC, and it strikes me that there is something wrong with
+> this. A renaming-as-body is a completion, not a declaration, so it doesn't
+> "declare" a subprogram. Shouldn't the wording be "...before the subprogram
+> it completes is frozen..."?
+
+Yes.
 
 ****************************************************************

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent