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
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,c52c30d32b866eae
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,c52c30d32b866eae
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2ea02452876a15e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Real OO
Date: 1996/05/15
Message-ID: <DrGtq8.1zx@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 154985511
references: <DrCw99.E3L.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
 <TYNOR.96May14100156@twratl.atlanta.twr.com> <DrF5r9.BKv@world.std.com>
 <TYNOR.96May15090527@twratl.atlanta.twr.com>
organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object
Date: 1996-05-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <TYNOR.96May15090527@twratl.atlanta.twr.com>,
Steve Tynor <tynor@atlanta.twr.com> wrote:
>"Availablity" relates to the "export status" of each feature. If I
>write: 
>[...explanation of VAPE deleted]

Makes sense, but it doesn't answer my original question.  Near the end
of 9.8, *after* the VAPE rule, there is a definition of "Availability of
an Assertion Clause" (which is not the same thing as availability of a
feature, although it's related).  My question was, can a precondition
ever be "unavailable"?  It seems to me that if it were, it would fail
VAPE, and therefore wouldn't be allowed in the first place.  Am I
confused?

- Bob