From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,470860aa3e635a7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Maciej Sobczak Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT for MS Visual Studio Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 06:25:46 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1191590746.132231.277960@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> References: <13f6eg0te46m2a3@corp.supernews.com> <4xsl4zw3bp.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <1191357491.860178.230380@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> <4702ADCC.7080209@obry.net> <1191439439.120567.172630@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <4703F02D.3030207@obry.net> <1191442124.099242.282130@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com> <1191529107.233474.287380@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <47054B4B.7080609@obry.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.141.44.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1191590746 25785 127.0.0.1 (5 Oct 2007 13:25:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:25:46 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <47054B4B.7080609@obry.net> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.7) Gecko/20070914 Firefox/2.0.0.7,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com; posting-host=128.141.44.124; posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:2317 Date: 2007-10-05T06:25:46-07:00 List-Id: On 4 Pa , 22:21, Pascal Obry wrote: > >http://www.adaic.org/standards/05aarm/html/AA-A.html > > > 3/2: > > > "The implementation shall ensure that each language- defined > > subprogram is reentrant in the sense that concurrent calls on the > > same subprogram perform as specified, so long as all parameters that > > could be passed by reference denote nonoverlapping objects." > > Fine but we are speaking about "reading" only the parameters. This does > not apply. I understand you, but I don't see this exclusion in the paragraph above. What I see is "subprogram", "calling", "parameter" and "overlapping". I don't see *any* distinction between reading and writing. I other words, the obvious guarantee that both of us would like to see in AARM is not there and what *is* there indicates the contrary. -- Maciej Sobczak * www.msobczak.com * www.inspirel.com