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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a5449b9a03812b50
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-07-29 04:01:19 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT documentation question
Date: 29 Jul 2002 04:01:19 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0207290301.1ade1b83@posting.google.com>
References: <mailman.1027658105.19107.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <3D417AB2.ADDD3F7A@boeing.com>
 <5ee5b646.0207281109.3894cc74@posting.google.com>
 <wcc3cu3ikab.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.240
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1027940479 1659 127.0.0.1 (29 Jul 2002 11:01:19
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 29 Jul 2002 11:01:19 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27443
Date: 2002-07-29T11:01:19+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in message news:<wcc3cu3ikab.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>...
> dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:


> I was always against having Annex M in the first place, and against any
> form of documentation requirements, so it might be the case that I was
> (therefore) sloppy.  (I am very much in favor of good documentation -- I
> just don't think an International Standard is the way to go about it.)

I think it's fine to have them there if you regard them as having the same
status as implementation advice, which is what happens in practice.

The idea that they ar eformal normative requirements is of course ludicrous
given the complete absence of a formal definition of what documentation means!