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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5095dad989e89e23
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-12-14 06:29:34 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.flash.net!news.flash.net!not-for-mail
From: "Ken Garlington" <Ken.Garlington@computer.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10011301306120.793-100000@lexis.di.fct.unl.pt>
 <tgzoihpon4.fsf@mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de> <9074fi$93b$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <3A3253B1.AD8F32CF@ebox.tninet.se> <90u1vi$uah$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <90ukfm$c4p$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3A36511D.973D82BD@nowhere.com>
 <yec1yvdtmf1.fsf@king.cts.com> <916gsr$e6e$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <slrn93eect.i1.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
 <IeLZ5.7495$bw.651358@news.flash.net>
 <slrn93f1ic.vo.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
 <tgn1e0mkqh.fsf@mercury.rus.uni-stuttgart.de> <9185a6$mut$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <87zoi0w0ey.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <91agoe$kvf$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Subject: Re: Does a null pointer always raise Constraint_Error?
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <hP4_5.7975$bw.730724@news.flash.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:29:33 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.215.81.40
X-Complaints-To: abuse@flash.net
X-Trace: news.flash.net 976804173 216.215.81.40 (Thu,
 14 Dec 2000 08:29:33 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 08:29:33 CST
Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3133
Date: 2000-12-14T14:29:33+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Robert Dewar" <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:91agoe$kvf$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
: In article <87zoi0w0ey.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>,
:   Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
: > I would argue that a.all and b.all are undefined,
: > but because of their type, their values can be
: > compared with a well-defined result anyway.
:
: I understand that argument, but I cannot see that
: it is backed by the language in the RM. Furthermore,
: there is an ACATS test that disputes this conclusion,
: and no one has ever contested this test.

The ACATS test seems to be consistent with the rest of the language. For
example, I'd assume that the following wouldn't work, either:

if (A/0) = (B/0) then...