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: 103376,341d2de6c663b990
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Patrick D. Rogers" <u270k@gsde.hso.link.com>
Subject: Re: VME address mapping
Date: 1998/07/02
Message-ID: <359BB621.9D6ED02B@gsde.hso.link.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 368128656
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <359798AA.9EF173BE@ti.com> <m37m1xxtwv.fsf@zaphod.enst.fr>
 <359A9B52.A0FF7B14@gsde.hso.link.com> <dewar.899335192@merv>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Raytheon
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-07-02T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> Patrick said
> 
> <<I'm puzzled as to how this satisfies RM 13.8(3):
> 
>    A code_statement is only allowed in the
> handled_sequence_of_statements
>    of a subprogram_body. If a subprogram_body contains any
> code_statements,
>    then within this subprogram_body the only allowed form of statement
> is
>    a code_statement (labeled or not), the only allowed declarative_items
>    are use_clauses, and no exception_handler is allowed (comments and
>    pragmas are allowed as usual).
> >>
> 
> The code that Sam quoted did not contain any code statements. 

Ah, thanks.  I missed the lack of the apostrophe, and thus that they
were not MCIs.