Re: Beaujolais Effect -- what is it?

Re: Beaujolais Effect -- what is it?

[Dave Papay M/S 7G32 x2791]

Will the "Beaujolais Effect" become the "Beaujolais Nouveau Effect" in Ada
9X? (sorry, I couldn't resists).

                             |         |
David Papay                  |    o    |
papay@acm.org  (preferred)   |  ^/---  | <insert your favorite disclaimer here>
dpapay@aol.com (alternate)   |  />     |
                             |         |
                             | fleche! |

Re: Beaujolais Effect -- what is it?

[Norman H. Cohen]

In article <00987C8A.289B09C0.48@gtewd.mtv.gtegsc.com>, Dave Papay M/S
7G32 x2791 <papayd@GTEWD.MTV.GTEGSC.COM> writes: 

|> Will the "Beaujolais Effect" become the "Beaujolais Nouveau Effect" in Ada
|> 9X? (sorry, I couldn't resists).

As a matter of fact, in May 1991 there was a meeting of the mapping team
and the Distinguished Reviewers hosted by Intermetrics in the Cambridge,
MA, area.  After a long day discussing Beaujolais effects and other
difficult subjects we met for dinner at a restaurant in Watertown, where
we were greeted by a framed poster reading, "Le beaujolais nouveau est
arrivee."

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com

Re: Beaujolais Effect -- what is it?

[Michael Hann]

The poster was in error . . . 'arrivee' is associated with a feminine
noun whereas 'Le beaujolais' indicates a masculine subject.

retentively yours

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Live free or die." - New Hampshire state motto

	mikeh@ssd.fsi.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Beaujolais Effect -- what is it?

[Tucker Taft]

In article <00987C8A.289B09C0.48@gtewd.mtv.gtegsc.com>,
Dave Papay M/S 7G32 x2791  <papayd@GTEWD.MTV.GTEGSC.COM> wrote:

>Will the "Beaujolais Effect" become the "Beaujolais Nouveau Effect" in Ada
>9X? (sorry, I couldn't resists).

We have eliminated all remnants of the Beaujolais Effect, but we did debate
various instances of the "Ripple" effect during the language revision
process (apologies to Gallo Ripple Wine enthusiasts ;-).

>David Papay                  
>papay@acm.org  (preferred)  
>dpapay@aol.com (alternate) 

-Tucker Taft  stt@inmet.com
Ada 9X Mapping/Revision Team
Intermetrics, Inc.

Beaujolais Effect -- what is it?

[Dave Papay M/S 7G32 x2791]

Tucker Taft <stt@DSD.CAMB.INMET.COM> writes:

>We have eliminated all remnants of the Beaujolais Effect, but we did debate
>various instances of the "Ripple" effect during the language revision
>process (apologies to Gallo Ripple Wine enthusiasts ;-).

Do these "Ripple" effects occur when you attempt to "Port" an Ada 83 program
to Ada 9X?  Perhaps someone could "gin" up a summary of the various
instances ;-)

You know, this thread is becoming more and more like the one concerning the
phonetic spelling of "fish."

                             |         |
David Papay                  |    o    |
papay@acm.org  (preferred)   |  ^/---  | <insert your favorite disclaimer here>
dpapay@aol.com (alternate)   |  />     |
                             |         |
                             | fleche! |

Re: Beaujolais Effect -- what is it?

[Tucker Taft]

In article <00987EBE.A6708E20.8@gtewd.mtv.gtegsc.com>,
Dave Papay M/S 7G32 x2791  <papayd@GTEWD.MTV.GTEGSC.COM> wrote:

>Tucker Taft <stt@DSD.CAMB.INMET.COM> writes:
>
>>We have eliminated all remnants of the Beaujolais Effect, but we did debate
>>various instances of the "Ripple" effect during the language revision
>>process (apologies to Gallo Ripple Wine enthusiasts ;-).
>
>Do these "Ripple" effects occur when you attempt to "Port" an Ada 83 program
>to Ada 9X?  Perhaps someone could "gin" up a summary of the various
>instances ;-)

No, the Ripple effects had very little to do with Ada 83/Ada 9X compatibility.
In brief, the (undesirable) Ripple effect was related to whether the
legality of a compilation unit could be affected by adding or removing an
otherwise unneeded "with" clause on some compilation unit on
which the unit depended, directly or indirectly.  

This issue came up at least twice.  One when we were considering
rules relating to use of attributes like 'Address.  In Ada 83 as
interpreted by the ARG, if a compilation unit contains a use
of 'Address, then there must be a "with" of package System
somewhere in the set of library unit specs "with"ed by the compilation
unit (directly or indirectly).  

In Ada 9X, we have eliminated this rule, as it was for some compilers an
unnecessary implementation burden, and didn't really provide any
value to the user (if anything, it created some confusion).
The rule now is that the use of an attibute that returns a value
of some particular type makes the compilation unit semantically
dependent on the library unit in which the type is declared (whether
or not it is "with"ed).

The second place the Ripple effect came up was when we were trying to
provide automatic direct visibility to (primitive) operators.  Ultimately
we ended up with an explicit "use type" clause for making operators
directly visible.  For a while we considered various rules that
would make all primitive operators directly visible; some of
the rules considered created the undesirable "Ripple" effects;
others created annoying incompatibilities; all were quite tricky
to implement correctly and efficiently.

>You know, this thread is becoming more and more like the one concerning the
>phonetic spelling of "fish."

GHOTI for sure.

>David Papay                  |    o    |
>papay@acm.org  (preferred)   |  ^/---  |
>dpapay@aol.com (alternate)   |  />     |

-Tucker Taft    stt@inmet.com
Ada 9X Mapping/Revision Team

Re: Beaujolais Effect -- what is it?

[David Weller]

In article <D070qy.2s8@inmet.camb.inmet.com>,
Tucker Taft <stt@spock.camb.inmet.com> wrote:
>
>The second place the Ripple effect came up was when we were trying to
>provide automatic direct visibility to (primitive) operators.  Ultimately
>we ended up with an explicit "use type" clause for making operators
>directly visible.  For a while we considered various rules that
>would make all primitive operators directly visible; some of
>the rules considered created the undesirable "Ripple" effects;
>others created annoying incompatibilities; all were quite tricky
>to implement correctly and efficiently.
>

Now that the Ripple effect has been fixed, can we fix the "Mad Dog
20/20" effect? (Don't ask me what the effect means -- the interesting
symptom of MD 20/20 is that you can't remember the incident after
you've been affected :-)


-- 
Proud (and vocal) member of Team Ada! (and Team OS/2)        ||This is not your
   	      Ada -- Very Cool.  Doesn't Suck.               ||  father's Ada 
For all sorts of interesting Ada tidbits, run the command:   ||________________
"finger dweller@starbase.neosoft.com | more" (or e-mail with "finger" as subj.)
	|"Quitting C++ isn't so difficult, provided you show as much |
	|	persistence stopping as you did starting." dweller   |