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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!mtune!codas!novavax!hcx1!brucej
From: brucej@hcx1.SSD.HARRIS.COM
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: RENAMES?
Message-ID: <94700003@hcx1>
Date: Mon, 17-Aug-87 16:02:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: hcx1.94700003
Posted: Mon Aug 17 16:02:00 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Aug-87 06:11:06 EDT
References: <94700001@hcx2>
Nf-ID: #R:hcx2:94700001:hcx1:94700003:000:422
Nf-From: hcx1.SSD.HARRIS.COM!brucej    Aug 17 16:02:00 1987
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


RM 8.5(3): "The elaboration of a renaming declaration evaluates the
name that follows the reserved word _renames_ and thereby determines the
entity denoted by this name (the renamed entity)."

The RM makes it pretty clear that the value of the renamed object
should be frozen at elaboration time, and that you should not expect
to be able to change it's value "behind the rename's back".

So the value of `ren_var' is 1.