CVS difference for ais/ai-00256.txt

Differences between 1.6 and version 1.7
Log of other versions for file ais/ai-00256.txt

--- ais/ai-00256.txt	2002/03/13 00:48:28	1.6
+++ ais/ai-00256.txt	2002/07/23 01:05:24	1.7
@@ -1,8 +1,9 @@
-!standard 13.11.01 (01)                                02-03-06  AI95-00256/04
+!standard 13.11.01 (01)                                02-07-19  AI95-00256/05
 !standard  A.12.01 (30)
 !standard  G.02.02 (03)
 !standard  7.06.01 (16)
 !standard  7.04 (09)
+!standard 10.02 (09)
 !class binding interpretation 01-02-12
 !status work item 01-02-12
 !status received 01-02-12
@@ -15,7 +16,7 @@
 
 (Note: This AI contains various wording changes that ought to be made to the
 standard for which there is expected to be no opposition to the change. The
-intent is that this AI will only be processed when a Corrigendum or Revision
+intent is that this AI will only be processed when a Corrigendum or Amendment
 is about to be issued.)
 
 1) The value of the Size_In_Storage_Elements is the maximum value that could be
@@ -32,6 +33,8 @@
 
 5) The reference in 7.4(9) should be to 13.14.
 
+6) 10.2(9) should say "names" rather than "mentions".
+
 !question
 
 1)
@@ -74,6 +77,11 @@
 The recursive reference from 7.4 to itself is incorrect. Should this be 13.14?
 (Yes.)
 
+6)
+The AI-00180 says that "mentioned" is used "informally" in 10.2(9); it it not
+intended to mean the technical term "mentioned". Should this be reworded to
+avoid the use of the technical term. (Yes.)
+
 !recommendation
 
 (See summary.)
@@ -114,6 +122,11 @@
 Certainly a reference from a clause to itself is in error. The wording suggests
 that the reference is to the freezing rules, which is clause 13.14.
 
+6)
+The AARM contains a note essentially to ignore the use of "mentioned" in this
+rule. That cannot be clear; it would be better to fix the rule in the
+Amendment.
+
 !corrigendum 7.04(09)
 
 @drepl
@@ -140,6 +153,29 @@
 whose Adjust failed. For an Adjust invoked as part of an assignment statement,
 any other adjustments due to be performed are performed, and then Program_Error
 is raised.>
+
+!corrigendum 10.02(09)
+
+@drepl
+The order of elaboration of library units is determined primarily by the
+@i<elaboration dependences>. There is an elaboration dependence of a given
+@fa<library_item> upon another if the given @fa<library_item> or any of its
+subunits depends semantically on the other @fa<library_item>. In addition, if a
+given @fa<library_item> or any of its subunits has a pragma Elaborate or
+Elaborate_All that mentions another library unit, then there is an elaboration
+dependence of the given @fa<library_item> upon the body of the other library
+unit, and, for Elaborate_All only, upon each @fa<library_item> needed by the
+declaration of the other library unit.
+@dby
+The order of elaboration of library units is determined primarily by the
+@i<elaboration dependences>. There is an elaboration dependence of a given
+@fa<library_item> upon another if the given @fa<library_item> or any of its
+subunits depends semantically on the other @fa<library_item>. In addition, if a
+given @fa<library_item> or any of its subunits has a pragma Elaborate or
+Elaborate_All that names another library unit, then there is an elaboration
+dependence of the given @fa<library_item> upon the body of the other library
+unit, and, for Elaborate_All only, upon each @fa<library_item> needed by the
+declaration of the other library unit.
 
 !corrigendum 13.11.01(03)
 

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent