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: 103376,1e67a7db835cf5a8 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ted Dennison Subject: Advice, or *Advice*? (was: Binary files vs Portablity vs Ada) Date: 1999/11/09 Message-ID: <80a6n3$k4e$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 546586414 References: <7vt67r$qv0$1@coward.ks.cc.utah.edu> <7vurt3$ojd$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7vuto0$pv0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7vvrin$gp9$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8074m8$bk8$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x26.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Nov 09 22:20:24 1999 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtedennison Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.6 [en] (WinNT; I) Date: 1999-11-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Robert A Duff wrote: > The reason certain rules are written as Implementation Advice is that > we didn't know how to formalize the rule. It's not that Impl Advice > is any less important than the "real" rules. So, I think you can But are all the advice at that level, or are some really just suggestions? From context and the attitudes I've seen from vendors, a lot of it appears to be the latter. > count on responsible implementers to not disobey the advice without > good reason. If you find otherwise, send in a bug report. If you find Here's an example: Until recently 2 of the 3 Ada compilers we have here at work did not follow the implementation advice in 11.4.1(19), putting *nothing* in Exception_Message. (Disclaimer: One of these was Gnat, which I *believe* had this problem. I don't have the "luxury" of having obsolete compiler documentation for Gnat laying around, like I do for my other compilers :-) ). When I complained to other compiler's support group about this over a year ago, it was treated as a feature enhancement request, not as a *bug*. We finally got a version that followed the advice about 4 weeks ago. As a point of comparison, this same company has taken no longer than 2 months to fix any of the other bugs that I submitted that were non-advice LRM compliance issues. As for the other compiler (well...ok, Gnat), I have heard reports that the situation has improved there recently, but I haven't yet checked it out. Others will be more qualified than I to say what it is doing, and what their policy towards this "bug" is/has been over the past year or so. -- T.E.D. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.