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,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,e12ee9b0877029b2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-10 18:13:03 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!195.25.12.36!oleane.net!oleane!freenix!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Disagreement between GNAT and Cohen? Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 03:12:14 +0200 Organization: PVV Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: References: <3D05456D.7050001@golter.demon.co.uk> Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1023757982 92258 137.194.161.2 (11 Jun 2002 01:13:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 01:13:02 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D05456D.7050001@golter.demon.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:25717 Date: 2002-06-11T03:12:14+02:00 Andrew Hoddinott wrote on 11/06/2002 (02:38) : > This kind of renaming is explicitly used by Cohen in a generics example > in section 15.2.3.2 of "Ada as a second language". (Cohen's full example > doesn't compile either, although only the first 2 lines of the error > message are generated). > > Am I missing something obvious here? Or is Cohen wrong? Or GNAT? Is > there something in the RM that supports GNAT's claim that "subprogram > used in renaming_as_body cannot be intrinsic"? Have you checked: http://www.research.ibm.com/people/n/ncohen/a3sl_errata.html -- Preben Randhol ------------------- http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/ -- �For me, Ada95 puts back the joy in programming.�