CVS difference for arm/source/04a.mss

Differences between 1.82 and version 1.83
Log of other versions for file arm/source/04a.mss

--- arm/source/04a.mss	2006/10/17 05:29:44	1.82
+++ arm/source/04a.mss	2006/10/18 00:25:24	1.83
@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
 @Part(04, Root="ada.mss")
 
-@Comment{$Date: 2006/10/17 05:29:44 $}
+@Comment{$Date: 2006/10/18 00:25:24 $}
 @LabeledSection{Names and Expressions}
 
 @Comment{$Source: e:\\cvsroot/ARM/Source/04a.mss,v $}
-@Comment{$Revision: 1.82 $}
+@Comment{$Revision: 1.83 $}
 
 @begin{Intro}
 @Redundant[The rules applicable to the different forms of @nt<name> and
@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@
 The nominal subtype of the @nt<indexed_component> is the
 component subtype of the array type.
 @begin{Ramification}
-@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[Deleted],ARef=[AI95-00363-01]}
+@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[DeletedNoDelMsg],ARef=[AI95-00363-01]}
 @ChgDeleted{Version=[2],Text=[In the case of an array whose components are
 aliased, and
 of an unconstrained discriminated subtype, the components
@@ -996,7 +996,7 @@
 The expected type for a literal @key(null) shall be a single
 access type.]}
 @begin{Discussion}
-@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[Deleted]}
+@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[DeletedNoDelMsg]}
 @ChgDeleted{Version=[2],Text=[This new wording ("expected type ... shall be a
 single ... type") replaces the old "shall be determinable" stuff. It reflects
 an attempt to simplify and unify the description of the rules for resolving
@@ -1044,7 +1044,7 @@
 access type@Redundant[, since such types do not have a null value
 (see @RefSecNum{Access Types})].]}
 @begin{Reason}
-@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[Deleted]}
+@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[DeletedNoDelMsg]}
 @ChgDeleted{Version=[2],Text=[This is a legality rule rather than an overloading
 rule, to simplify implementations.]}
 @end{Reason}
@@ -3753,7 +3753,7 @@
 identify some other numeric type to which the result is to be converted,
 either explicitly or implicitly].]}
 @begin(Discussion)
-@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[Deleted]}
+@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[DeletedNoDelMsg]}
 @ChgDeleted{Version=[2],Text=[The @i(small) of @i(universal_fixed) is infinitesimal; no loss
 of precision is permitted.
 However, fixed-fixed division is impractical to implement when
@@ -3764,7 +3764,7 @@
 expressions like A * B * C if A, B, and C are each of some fixed point
 type.]}
 
-@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[Deleted]}
+@ChgRef{Version=[2],Kind=[DeletedNoDelMsg]}
 @ChgDeleted{Version=[2],Text=[On the other hand, X := A * B; is permitted by this rule, even if X, A, and B
 are all of different fixed point types, since the expected type
 for the result of the multiplication is the type of X, which is necessarily

Questions? Ask the ACAA Technical Agent