Re: Attributes 'Version and 'Body_Version

[dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)]

"Nick Roberts" <nickroberts@adaos.worldonline.co.uk> wrote in message news:<9tu7nj$4v9lc$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de>...

>> There is no point in using the same attribute
>> name for two different purposes.
> 
> Yes there is: simplicity.

That's a really peculiar view, confusing two separate
concepts by using the same name certainly does not make
things simpler, quite the contrary.

> > Also, extending the meaning of 'Version would be a 
> > language
> > extension that would create a non-conforming variant of
> > Ada.
> 
> No it wouldn't.

Nick, you really don't know the RM well enough. You are
completely and 100% wrong on this. Please don't make such
statements without carefully checking. There is far too
much misinformation on this newsgroup.

Section 2.8 of the RM is perfectly clear. The only
implementation permission is to add implementation
dependent pragmas, and the name is required to be
different from any other pragma. This is really not
a hard rule to find!

14   An implementation may provide implementation-defined pragmas; the
name of an implementation-defined pragma shall differ from those of
the language-defined pragmas.

Changing the meaning of an existing pragma, by extension
or otherwise is DEFINITELY a non-conforming language
change. That's perfectly clear from the RM.

> I'm sorry, but the confusion in this case is all yours, 
> Robert!

Really Nick, you must spend more time reading the
RM *carefully* and avoid spreading misinformation!