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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5850c59062ca527a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-11-01 15:04:30 PST
Path: 
 bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!watnews.watson.ibm.com!ncohen
From: ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Type System.ADDRESS
Date: 1 Nov 1994 23:04:30 GMT
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <396hhu$1idp@watnews1.watson.ibm.com>
References: <CyKJJv.IEr@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
 <395ecb$bjq@theopolis.orl.mmc.com>
Reply-To: ncohen@watson.ibm.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: rios8.watson.ibm.com
Date: 1994-11-01T23:04:30+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <395ecb$bjq@theopolis.orl.mmc.com>, rgilbert@orl.mmc.com (Bob
Gilbert) writes: 

|> I wish I knew exactly what I mean by static, but from the vendor
|> in question they state: 
|>
|>   Any assignments to type System.Address require a static expression.

That strikes me as a bogus implementation.  I'm surprised this gets by
the ACVC.

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com