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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!gegeweb.org!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!loke.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Interrupt_Handler and "directly specified"
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:25:46 -0600
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <n2o34r$c1r$1@loke.gir.dk>
References: <n2nou4$jap$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rrsoftware.com
X-Trace: loke.gir.dk 1448054747 12347 24.196.82.226 (20 Nov 2015 21:25:47 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:25:47 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:28481
Date: 2015-11-20T15:25:46-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"G.B." <bauhaus@futureapps.invalid> wrote in message 
news:n2nou4$jap$1@dont-email.me...
> For a protected handler, I had specified an aspect,
>
>    procedure On_1
>    with Interrupt_Handler => True;
>
> and got a strange compiler diagnostic, listed below.
>
> Is the above syntax correct?

Yes.

> I could drop " => True" and the compiler seemed happy. OTOH,
> the RM states, in C.3.1 6.2/3, that "if not directly specified,
> the aspect is False".
>
> I don't know what "directly specified" in RM C.3.1 means,
> exactly. Does it mean just specified as opposed to no
> such aspect specified (in source, near it)? So drop "=> ..."
> for truth?

"directly specified" means explicitly given on this entity (as opposed to 
inheriting a value from some ancestor, which is considered "specified").

If you leave the value off of any aspect specification, the value is True. 
(see 13.1.1(15/3)). So in
    with Pack, Atomic, Pure, Interrupt_Handler, Import;
all of these aspects have the value True. (And you'll get some errors.)

If
    procedure On_1 with Interrupt_Handler;
works and
    procedure On_1 with Interrupt_Handler => True;
does not, you've got a compiler bug, because these mean exactly the same 
thing.

                               Randy.