Re: fyi, GNAT and SPARK GPL 2016 are out

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

"Georg Bauhaus" <bauhaus@futureapps.invalid> wrote in message 
news:niuvov$kvf$1@dont-email.me...
> On 04.06.16 18:13, gautier_niouzes@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Is there an inclusion of pragma Suppress(Container_Checks) into the 
>> standard on its way ? Then the remarks such as A.18.4, 69/2 could be 
>> updated accordingly.
>
> Doesn't your workaround demonstrate just how the behavior
> shown by GNAT contradicts the one to expect from standards
> conformance? Or is -gnatp now overruling the effect which
>
>     Element (No_Element)
>
> is supposed to have?
>
> If this call is not the subject of some ACATS test, perhaps it
> should become one?

I believe that is covered by an ACATS test. But it's irrelevant in this 
case, as one runs the ACATS with a particular set of options (which 
certainly does not include -gnatp). Every compiler has options that aren't 
(strictly speaking) Standards-conforming. Don't use those if you care. ;-)

                                          Randy.