Re: Task discriminants

["Martin Dowie" <martin.dowie@btopenworld.com>]

"Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:0pGdnb8KMtY7Ni7dRVn-jw@megapath.net...
> > Absolutely! But that was kind of my question - is there any
implementation
> > that won't give the desired result in this case? Not to my knowledge but
> then
> > I don't have access to every implementation...
>
> I meant even on a particular implementation. A different setting of
> optimization flags, a different expression in the discriminant default,
and
> an implementation that appears to work on your test program could do
> something different. So just because you have some instance of it that
works
> with some particular set of compiler switches does not mean that that
> implementation "gives the desired result" in general. Only your
implementor
> could really tell you, and even they might not know for sure.

Really?!

I'm not sure what you mean by "a different expression in the
discriminant default" - that's always going to be a call to the
function in the example I gave? No?

As to different optimization flags, I would have thought that falls under
the same category "haven't found one yet that does anything other than
the 'sensible' option" - but you never know.

There are other precedents for "polling" to find out what all ARA compiler
vendors do in particular cases - I guess I'd be interested in such a poll.
If
there is already a 'de facto' standard implmentation I don't see any harm
in making it Implementation Advice - I do see the harm in requiring such
behaviour! ;-)

I also recognize that I'm but one (user) voice and that the
ARA/Ada-Comment have better things to do! For me I'm ok with assuming
the 'sensible' option and testing it happens - that may be good enough for
other folks.

Cheers

-- Martin