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,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e67a7db835cf5a8
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: Binary files vs Portablity vs Ada
Date: 1999/11/09
Message-ID: <wccaeonfthh.fsf@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 546524589
Sender: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
References: <7vt67r$qv0$1@coward.ks.cc.utah.edu> <7vurt3$ojd$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <7vuto0$pv0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7vvrin$gp9$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <8074m8$bk8$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-11-09T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> writes:

> Perhaps. But advice is just that; advice. No guarantees. If you are
> trying to do something universally portable, you can't count on
> implementation advice.

The reason certain rules are written as Implementation Advice is that we
didn't know how to formalize the rule.  It's not that Impl Advice is any
less important than the "real" rules.  So, I think you can count on
responsible implementers to not disobey the advice without good reason.
If you find otherwise, send in a bug report.  If you find poor
documentation (whether or not the RM "required" that documentation),
send in a bug report.

- Bob