Re: seperate keyword and seperate compilation with Gnat?

[dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)]

Jon says

"I was not saying that the statement _should_ have been in the
standard.  I can actually accept that the RM as it stands is clear
enough on the issue.  My only point is (and it _still_ is) that the
statement is FAR clearer than what the RM actually says."

But you are looking at things in isolation, which is always misleading.
If you intend to use your approach here, then you must consider the
full changes to the RM to accomodate this approach. If you simply add
your statement as normative text, then it is redundant, and redundancy,
while useful in tutorial material is the enemy of precise definition.
So that means you have to remove stuff to add your statement. I don'
t see how that would work, since your negative statement still seems
pretty content free to me in definitional terms. But it would be
interesting to see how you would rewrite the whole section. I very
much doubt it would be clearer, but of course one cannot be sure without
seeing the entire section rewritten.