CVS difference for ais/ai-00233.txt

Differences between 1.4 and version 1.5
Log of other versions for file ais/ai-00233.txt

--- ais/ai-00233.txt	2001/10/19 01:36:44	1.4
+++ ais/ai-00233.txt	2002/05/25 03:42:18	1.5
@@ -1,8 +1,9 @@
-!standard  12.05      (08)                             01-10-17  AI95-00233/02
+!standard  12.05      (08)                             02-05-09  AI95-00233/03
 !standard  12.05.1    (20)
 !standard  12.05.1    (21)
 !class binding interpretation 00-04-27
-!status ARG approved 6-0-2  01-10-07
+!status Amendment 200Y 02-05-09
+!status ARG Approved 6-0-2  01-10-07
 !status work item 00-04-27
 !status received 00-04-27
 !qualifier Clarification
@@ -13,7 +14,7 @@
 !summary
 
 Components of a generic formal derived type become visible following the rules
-of 7.3.1(4).
+of 7.3.1(3/1-6/1).
 
 The wording of 12.5(8/1) and 12.5.1(21/1) should be consistent with
 7.3.1(3/1-6/1).
@@ -49,17 +50,17 @@
                        To_The_Message : in out Message_Type) is
        begin
           To_The_Message.The_Content -- Legal? (Yes.)
-             (1 .. From_The_Word'length) := From_The_Word;
+             (1 .. From_The_Word'Length) := From_The_Word;
        end Copy;
 
    end Parent.Child;
 
-7.3.1(4) clearly indicates that it applies only to a type declared by
+7.3.1(4/1) clearly indicates that it applies only to a type declared by
 a derived_type_declaration, but a generic formal derived type is not such a
 type. Thus the rules seem to say that The_Content is not visible above. Is
 this correct? (No.)
 
-Also, Technical Corrigendum 1, the wording of 7.3.1(3-6) was changed from
+Also, in Technical Corrigendum 1, the wording of 7.3.1(3-6) was changed from
     "within the immediate scope of"
 to
     "later immediately within the declarative region of"
@@ -84,16 +85,16 @@
   new discriminant_part is not specified), as for a derived type defined by a
   derived_type_definition (see 3.4).
 
-This clearly states what components are inherited; the rules of 7.3.1(3-4)
+This clearly states what components are inherited; the rules of 7.3.1(3/1-4/1)
 apply.
 
 An argument has been made that this does not define *where* the components
 become visible. However, this does not make sense; why should only part of
-rules given in 7.3.1(3-4) apply in this case? Absent any rules to the contrary
-in the standard, the only logical conclusion is that components of formal
-private and derived types are inherited and made visible as described in
-7.3.1(3-4). To clarify this, 7.3.1 is added to the cross-reference in
-12.5.1(20).
+the rules given in 7.3.1(3/1-4/1) apply in this case? Absent any rules to the
+contrary in the standard, the only logical conclusion is that components
+of formal private and derived types are inherited and made visible as
+described in 7.3.1(3/1-4/1). To clarify this, 7.3.1 is added to the
+cross-reference in 12.5.1(20).
 
 The ACATS test that prompted this discussion has been in use for 5 years, so
 it is clear that all compilers currently follow the recommendation.

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent