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: 103376,7cb7162c2b845e9b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Unsupported Annexes
Date: 1999/11/27
Message-ID: <81nn35$ebj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 553509754
References: <1e1urrd.1fjz88r1pc4s2jN%dwalker07@snet.net.invalid>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x43.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Nov 27 04:35:49 1999 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-11-27T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1e1urrd.1fjz88r1pc4s2jN%dwalker07@snet.net.invalid>,
  dwalker07@snet.net.invalid (Daryle Walker) wrote:
> At least, if an annex is unsupported, are the keywords from
> that annex still reserved?

As is clear in the RM, the annexes NEVER introduce new syntax
(and hence do not introduce new keywords), precisely to avoid
the kind of scenario you suggest.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.