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,ac5c3bc59168d76,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "James A. Squire" Subject: Subprogram Renaming Date: 1996/04/05 Message-ID: <31655314.19A0@csehp3.mdc.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 146057436 sender: Ada programming language references: comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: MDA Avionics Tools & Processes mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (X11; I; HP-UX A.09.01 9000/715) Date: 1996-04-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: According to section 6.2 of the Ada95 Rationale, "In Ada95, we allow a subprogram body to be provided by renaming another subprogram. This is a great convenience in those many cases in Ada83 where the programmer was forced to provide a body which simply called some other existing subprogram." In the Ada95 LRM, section 8.5 has: renaming_declaration ::= object_renaming_declaration |exception_renaming_declaration |package_renaming_declaration |subprogram_renaming_declaration |generic_renaming_declaration In the Ada83 LRM, the only thing not included in this syntax diagram was the "generic_renaming_declaration", which is not what 6.2 of the Rationale is talking about. So I am totally at a loss to see how Ada95 added anything to the case cited in 6.2 of the Rationale to allow you to do something you weren't able to do in Ada83. Can someone please help me understand this terribly confusing section of the Rationale? Thank you. -- James Squire MDA Avionics Tools & Processes ja_squire@csehp3.mdc.com "one of these days I'm going to better myself by going to Knight school" "You'll be a web knight instead of a web page!"