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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,87c9eb1ac78f3483
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: [Ada.]Text_IO.Create
Date: 1997/05/15
Message-ID: <1997May15.111011.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 241725530
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eisner.decus.org
References: <3378c3c3.3637188@news.demon.co.uk>
 <3379CE8B.2781E494@spam.innocon.com> <dewar.863640175@merv>
X-Nntp-Posting-User: KILGALLEN
X-Trace: 863709027/28246
Organization: LJK Software
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-05-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <dewar.863640175@merv>, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
> Jeff said
> 
> <<I think you'll find that this behavior is implementation defined. ALMOST
> all versions I've used deleted the existing file and created a new,
> empty file with the same name (or truncated the existing file to zero
> bytes; I can't tell the difference :). Anyway, since you're creating an
> implementation, you're free to decide what it does.>
> 
> No, I think you will find the behavior very consistent accross 
> implementations (have a look at the chapter 14 tests in the ACVC!)

If those tests are the ones DEC Ada passed, then I guess the proper
behaviour is the one I always thought was proper...

...create a new file with the next higher version number !!!

Larry Kilgallen