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: 103376,203d1f2317947ef5,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Chris Sparks <sparks@AISF.COM>
Subject: others clause
Date: 1996/08/29
Message-ID: <INFO-ADA%96082914113458@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 177505850
sender: Ada programming language <INFO-ADA@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU>
comments: cc: sparks@billings.aisf.com
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Elm [revision: 112.6]
Date: 1996-08-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Why is the following not incorrect?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
procedure T is

  type Enum is (A, B, C, D, E, F);

  T1 : Enum    := Enum'First;
  T2 : Integer := 0;

begin
  case T1 is
    when A      => null;
    when B      => null;
    when C      => null;
    when D      => null;
    when E      => null;
    when F      => null;
    when others => null;               --WHY ISN'T THIS ERRONEOUS?
  end case;

  case T2 is
    when Integer'First .. -1 => null;
    when 0                   => null;
    when 1 .. Integer'Last   => null;
    when others              => null;  --WHY ISN'T THIS ERRONEOUS?
  end case;

end T;
---------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to me that if we have identified all of the possible values,
then other would be invalid.  You can't test for others in the above
two cases!

Any feedback would be appreciated.

Chris Sparks (aka Mr. Ada)
sparks@aisf.com