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,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d8f5d49733f921b0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>
Subject: Re: Children of private compilation units
Date: 1999/05/25
Message-ID: <7if7sg$j6n$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 482050647
References: <7hslge$qad$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <37430B99.698B22FB@averstar.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x26.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue May 25 22:23:15 1999 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-05-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <37430B99.698B22FB@averstar.com>,
  Tucker Taft <stt@averstar.com> wrote:
> dennison@telepath.com wrote:
> >
> > I have a situation where Gnat and ObjectAda are giving me
conflicting
> > results.
>
> I believe ObjectAda is in the right (see below).


Actually it seems that GNAT is right, and Tuck has agreed with
this position in a subsequent ARG discussion. This program is
indeed illegal as it stands. I will let Tuck elucidate :-)

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies



--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---