From lehman@ida.org Tue Mar 3 13:37:40 1998 Return-Path: Received: from inmet.com by dsd.camb.inmet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA02474; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:37:40 -0500 Received: from cs.ida.org by inmet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA01510; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:37:39 -0500 Received: from poseidon.csed.ida.org (poseidon.csed.ida.org [129.246.81.32]) by cs.ida.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA18226; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:37:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by poseidon.csed.ida.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA02667; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:39:59 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:39:59 -0500 From: lehman@ida.org (Dan Lehman) Message-Id: <199803031839.NAA02667@poseidon.csed.ida.org> To: ada9xmrt@inmet.com, ada-comment@sw-eng.falls-church.va.us Subject: Re: 98.0227 fulltext of ada-comments X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII content-length: 1460 !topic object subtype must statically match designated subtype !reference RM95-4.6 (16) !reference 1998-15802.a Ted Baker 1998-2-25 !reference 1998-15803.a Norman H Cohen 1998-2-26 !reference 1998-15810.a Ted Baker 1998-2-27 !reference as: 1998-15815.a Robert Dewar 1998-2-28>> !reference 1998-15816.a Ted Baker 1998-3-1 !reference 1998-15817.a Robert A Duff 1998-3-2 !from Dan Lehman <> !discussion TB [BTW, where in the ARM does it specify that if X is a formal TB parameter passed by reference X'Address is the address of the TB actual parameter and not the address of the formal parameter TB (i.e., the location where the address of the actual parameter is TB stored)?] BD One could argue that it follows from 6.4.1(10). The formal and actual BD denote two different views of the same object, and 'Address gives you BD the address of the object -- there's no such thing as an address of a BD view. And, Bob, you might recall that this subtle point arose in an ACVC deliberation: > |Note that formal parameters of a tagged type are not objects in their > |own right; they are just views. 6.4.1(10). > > Since 3.3(4) gives a somewhat different view, one might object. [sorry] > Should this have an AI-ish note of explanation--to qualify 3.3(4) to mean > "... formal parameter that is passed by copy ..."? > > ---Dan > ------- * > > Yeah, I guess so. > > - Bob ============================================================================= From lehman@ida.org Tue Mar 3 13:37:42 1998 Return-Path: Received: from inmet.com by dsd.camb.inmet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA02484; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:37:41 -0500 Received: from sw-eng.falls-church.va.us by inmet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA01512; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:37:40 -0500 Received: from cs.ida.org by sw-eng.falls-church.va.us (8.8.8/) id SAA28418; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 18:33:58 GMT Received: from poseidon.csed.ida.org (poseidon.csed.ida.org [129.246.81.32]) by cs.ida.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA18226; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:37:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by poseidon.csed.ida.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA02667; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:39:59 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 13:39:59 -0500 From: lehman@ida.org (Dan Lehman) Message-Id: <199803031839.NAA02667@poseidon.csed.ida.org> To: ada9xmrt@inmet.com, ada-comment@sw-eng.falls-church.va.us Subject: Re: 98.0227 fulltext of ada-comments X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII content-length: 1460 !topic object subtype must statically match designated subtype !reference RM95-4.6 (16) !reference 1998-15802.a Ted Baker 1998-2-25 !reference 1998-15803.a Norman H Cohen 1998-2-26 !reference 1998-15810.a Ted Baker 1998-2-27 !reference as: 1998-15815.a Robert Dewar 1998-2-28>> !reference 1998-15816.a Ted Baker 1998-3-1 !reference 1998-15817.a Robert A Duff 1998-3-2 !from Dan Lehman <> !discussion TB [BTW, where in the ARM does it specify that if X is a formal TB parameter passed by reference X'Address is the address of the TB actual parameter and not the address of the formal parameter TB (i.e., the location where the address of the actual parameter is TB stored)?] BD One could argue that it follows from 6.4.1(10). The formal and actual BD denote two different views of the same object, and 'Address gives you BD the address of the object -- there's no such thing as an address of a BD view. And, Bob, you might recall that this subtle point arose in an ACVC deliberation: > |Note that formal parameters of a tagged type are not objects in their > |own right; they are just views. 6.4.1(10). > > Since 3.3(4) gives a somewhat different view, one might object. [sorry] > Should this have an AI-ish note of explanation--to qualify 3.3(4) to mean > "... formal parameter that is passed by copy ..."? > > ---Dan > ------- * > > Yeah, I guess so. > > - Bob =============================================================================