Re: Question about Ada renaming...

[stluka@software.org (Fred Stluka)]

In article <9103201431.AA27295@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu> NCOHEN@IBM.COM ("Norman H. Cohen") writes:
> Fred Stluka asked whether the type marks A.INT and AAA.INT, where A is a
> renaming of package AAA, should be considered to conform.  According to
> Ada 83 rules, they should not.
> ...
> Conformance is not transitive:  Though A.INT conforms to INT and INT
> conforms to AAA.INT, A.INT does not conform to AAA.INT.

Thanks for the definitive answer, Norm.

Another question:  Why is it defined this way?  For ease of 
implementation only?  Or is there another reason?  I couldn't
find the answer in the "Rationale for the Design of the Ada 
Programming Language".

Finally:  What are the dates of the most current versions of
the rationale document (my copy is copyrighted 1986), and the 
Ada "Implementer's Guide" (various pages of my copy are marked:
     "DRAFT Version G1; 82-09-29",
     "DRAFT Version G2; 84-12-26", 
     "DRAFT Version G1; 85-05-01",
etc)?  And where can I get current versions?

Thanks,
--Fred
-- 

Fred Stluka                              Internet: stluka@software.org
Software Productivity Consortium         UUNET:    ...!uunet!software!stluka
2214 Rock Hill Rd, Herndon VA 22070 USA