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,cd5c71f09395807a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Assertions in Ada
Date: 1997/08/24
Message-ID: <dewar.872431899@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 268346278
References: <adaworksEF8qn5.I15@netcom.com>
 <EF9nDu.EIK.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com> <33FF9DEC.2B52@flash.net>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-08-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


<<Even now, it appears that pragma Assert has some variations
among vendors (e.g. the example code in my paper, which works
under GNAT, has to have the pragmas moved to work with the
Aonix products).>>


Yes, Ken pointed out this variation, but this is not a matter of design,
it is more a matter of a bug in GNAT that no one ever noticed before,
namely GNAT allows pragma Assert in a place where it probably does not
intend to. In GNAT a pragma Assert is simply optional executable code,
it is not some kind of abstract specification, and therefore it should
only occur where a statement or declaration can appear.