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,b14cbbd362590ac9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Robert Dewar Subject: Re: Rep-spec question Date: 1999/11/12 Message-ID: <80h3cs$kop$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 547720844 References: <80ck3b$deu$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <80clia$ein$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <80clr0$etf$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <80cqb7$if9$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <80djt4$4jt$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <80ek3j$qnq$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x30.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Nov 12 13:06:39 1999 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-11-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <80ek3j$qnq$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ted Dennison wrote: > But an even stronger statement than you made, such as "this > works on all > known compilers", is not the same as "this is guaranteed to work on all > compilers". It is not. Sorry, I don't understand. You obviously do NOT use rep clauses on a compiler that does not claim annex C conformance. Noting that rep clauses are not guaranteed to be implemented in the absence of annex C is of course true, but completely uninteresting, since no one in practice who knows what they are doing even a little bit would make the mistake of thinking otherwise. In practice, all compilers that are intended for use in environments where rep clauses make sense implement Annex C in any case, so in practice, there is no problem here. Yes, I suppose someone could be sufficiently unaware that they would use a compiler that does not implement annex C and be suprised, but that's just a special case of people not knowing the language, and being surprised by their lack of knowledge. If you are saying that you have a compiler that claims annex C compliance and does not implement all the recommended clauses in chapter 13, then the compiler is non-conforming, or more pragmatically, you have found a bug in the compiler and should report it. It for sure is the case in Ada 95 that optional annexes are optional, and (how amazing) compilers that do not implement optional annexes cannot be expected by users to provide the facilities in those annexes! Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.