* Ada 2012: An Oops in the new Ada amendments ? (in 10.1.2 Context Clauses - With Clauses)
@ 2010-08-10 17:28 Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) @ 2010-08-10 17:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
Hi all,
I was reading the amendments (no too much deeply) which comes with Ada
2012, and there is an update which I do not understand :
http://www.ada-auth.org/ai-files/grab_bag/Amendment-2-D9.html
In “10.1.2 Context Clauses - With Clauses” says
> Replace paragraph 12: [AI05-0077-1]A name denoting a library item that
> is visible only due to being
> mentioned in one or more with_clauses that include the reserved
> word private shall appear only within:
> by:
> A name denoting a library_item that is visible only due to being
> mentioned in one or more with_clauses that include the reserved
> word private shall appear only within:
I have check multiple times, word by word, and this ends up to be the
exact same to me.
An error or something I missed ?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada 2012: An Oops in the new Ada amendments ? (in 10.1.2 Context Clauses - With Clauses)
2010-08-10 17:28 Ada 2012: An Oops in the new Ada amendments ? (in 10.1.2 Context Clauses - With Clauses) Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
@ 2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) @ 2010-08-10 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
OK, sorry, I see: “library item” vs “library_item” (the underscore).
When I see this kind of things, do I have to understand this is a matter
of unformally defined item (old version) vs formally defined item (new
version) ? If this was made part of an amendment, I suppose the concern is
more than typo or formatting.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada 2012: An Oops in the new Ada amendments ? (in 10.1.2 Context Clauses - With Clauses)
2010-08-10 17:28 Ada 2012: An Oops in the new Ada amendments ? (in 10.1.2 Context Clauses - With Clauses) Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
@ 2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-08-10 22:32 ` Randy Brukardt
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) @ 2010-08-10 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
OK, sorry, I see: “library item” vs “library_item” (the underscore).
When I see this kind of things, do I have to understand this is a matter
of unformally defined item (old version) vs formally defined item (new
version) ? If this was made part of an amendment, I suppose the concern is
more than typo or formatting.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada 2012: An Oops in the new Ada amendments ? (in 10.1.2 Context Clauses - With Clauses)
2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
@ 2010-08-10 22:32 ` Randy Brukardt
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Randy Brukardt @ 2010-08-10 22:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1037 bytes --]
"Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote in message
news:op.vg8gu8dwule2fv@garhos...
> OK, sorry, I see: "library item" vs "library_item" (the underscore).
>
> When I see this kind of things, do I have to understand this is a matter
> of unformally defined item (old version) vs formally defined item (new
> version) ? If this was made part of an amendment, I suppose the concern is
> more than typo or formatting.
Right. The second one is also in the syntax font, so it is a more formal
definition of what is being talked about. (The Standard often uses the
English equivalent of a syntax form, but those are rarely if ever defined.
We tend to change them when we see them for a better formal definition,
although there are some cases where that's wrong. [Specifically, "function
call" is generally thought to include infix operators, while the syntactic
"function_call" definitely does not include infix operators. The fun of
maintaining a Standard.]
Randy.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-08-10 22:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-08-10 17:28 Ada 2012: An Oops in the new Ada amendments ? (in 10.1.2 Context Clauses - With Clauses) Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-08-10 17:43 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-08-10 22:32 ` Randy Brukardt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox