CVS difference for ais/ai-00381.txt

Differences between 1.1 and version 1.2
Log of other versions for file ais/ai-00381.txt

--- ais/ai-00381.txt	2004/06/10 04:28:48	1.1
+++ ais/ai-00381.txt	2004/06/10 05:39:58	1.2
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 !status work item 04-06-08
 !status received 04-06-08
 !priority Medium
-!difficulty Low
+!difficulty Easy
 !subject New Restrictions identifier No_Dependence
 
 !summary
@@ -84,5 +84,44 @@
 An ACATS test should be created for this pragma.
 
 !appendix
+
+From: Tucker Taft
+Sent: Monday, June 7, 2004 11:48 PM
+
+Here is my last homework assignment (I hope, and probably
+so do you ;-).  It is a proposal to add a restriction-parameter
+identifier "No_Dependence" whose expression is a static string
+identifying a language-defined or implementation-defined
+library unit.  No compilation unit in the partition may
+have a semantic dependence on this library unit.
+
+I chose to use a static string rather than an unquoted
+name to conform to the basic syntax of
+    restriction_parameter_identifier => expression
+This decision is debatable.  See the !discussion for
+a bit more rationale.
+
+****************************************************************
+
+From: Robert A Duff
+Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2004 10:30 AM
+
+I don't care much one way or the other, but I suspect most users would
+find the quotes to be superfluous.
+
+Also, I wonder whether the string can contain blanks and other
+whitespace:
+
+    pragma Restrictions
+        (No_Dependence => "Ada.     " & ascii.nl & " Command_Line");
+
+I don't want to clutter the RM with rules forbidding such.
+But when it comes to ascii.nl, whether that's whitespace might
+be considered implementation dependent.
+
+Does "Ada.Command_Line -- comment" correspond to a full expanded name?
+
+Syntactically using a 'name' avoids worrying about such silliness.
+I realize it might complicate the wording.
 
 ****************************************************************

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent