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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.182.236.74 with SMTP id us10mr421720obc.36.1386304593258;
        Thu, 05 Dec 2013 20:36:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.50.73.99 with SMTP id k3mr9017igv.9.1386304592996; Thu, 05
 Dec 2013 20:36:32 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!p15no7122497qaj.0!news-out.google.com!9ni1961qaf.0!nntp.google.com!p15no7122490qaj.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:36:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <l7qn02$v8t$1@loke.gir.dk>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=150.101.201.124;
 posting-account=pBdvJAoAAAAbTiQ-L1tpxD99i_UttsrJ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.101.201.124
References: <45ccc264-b606-45d1-a766-f1d8e652212f@googlegroups.com>
 <52a04caa$0$6636$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <l7qn02$v8t$1@loke.gir.dk>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c6c71018-0e6e-46a7-a8f5-fdac132ab68d@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Reason for 'Ada.Strings.Bounded' not being declared 'pragma Pure'
 ?
From: Rod Kay <rodakay@internode.on.net>
Injection-Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 04:36:33 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:17860
Date: 2013-12-05T20:36:32-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Friday, 6 December 2013 07:17:05 UTC+11, Randy Brukardt  wrote:
> We re-analyzed all of the existing packages for Ada 2005, and changed the 
> categorization of some of them. The details can be found in AI95-0362-1 
>

   Thank you for the detailed explanation, Randy. I see the matter has been given a good deal of thought. I'd be happy to submit a request for further consideration in the next standard, if it seems a reasonable request.