From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Reduction expressions
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 13:36:54 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <ly5xs4d2ft.fsf@pushface.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 14:36:54 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5cd0239b4eff91ac64088d28791f4754";
	logging-data="4084683"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+D5fp+IVw56Vjz5pHq4YcxaabHYasBMwc="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DMpt3L4RKGeJtaylq4/JMw7k0PM=
	sha1:Qz+9a3gho8GhxlJ3yFRm5SrPM4g=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:66301
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Are the Accum_Type & Value_Type (ARM 4.5.10(9/5)) of a reduction attribute
reference required to be definite?

ARM 4.5.10(24/5) & (25.5) seem to imply so, which explains why GNAT
doesn't support e.g. String.