Re: What exactly is the licensing situation with GNAT?

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote in message news:...
...
> Right, but there are a number of other cases that 
> No_Implementation_Extensions covers: implementation-defined things in 
> language-defined packages (there are a number of such places in the RM, 
> such as in System); No_Implementation_Aspect_Specifications (obviously 
> only relevant for Ada 2012, but still important); and 
> No_Implementation_Units (which covers implementation-defined descendants 
> of Ada, System, and Interfaces; implementation-defined children of Ada are 
> banned, but grandchildren are allowed).
>
> Still not covered are issues like the representation of predefined types 
> (esp. Integer and Float), and implementation-defined behavior (such as 
> what happens when a potentially blocking operation is called from a 
> protected action). These things can't really be detected at compile-time.

I should have mentioned that  for GNAT, you also should use pragma 
No_Dependence (GNAT) to ensure that none of the GNAT defined packages are 
used.

                                       Randy.