From roby Wed Jan 7 17:07:38 1998 Return-Path: Received: by cronus.csed.ida.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA17566; Wed, 7 Jan 1998 17:07:38 -0500 From: roby (Clyde Roby) Message-Id: <199801072207.RAA17566@cronus.csed.ida.org> Subject: Issue #086, Also consider A_Formal_Package_Declaration[_With_Box] as instantiation To: LeGuenne@ACT-Europe.FR (Alain LeGuennec) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 17:07:37 -0500 (EST) Cc: roby (me), Colket@ACM.Org (Currie Colket) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2955 Status: OR Alain, Thank you for your email discussing resolution of Issue #084. We have taken your advice and split the issue into two issues, #086 and #087. This email concerns Issue #086. We are enclosing the new issue for your concurrence. We are also enclosing what we think is your suggested solution. If you agree with this issue and its solution, please let us know so we can forward them on to ASIS-Technical. Clyde and Currie ------- ISSUE: !ASIS Issue #086 !topic Also consider A_Formal_Package_Declaration[_With_Box] as instantiations !reference ASIS 95-15 !from Alain LeGuennec 98-01-07 !keywords generic formal package parameters instantiation box !discussion Note that this issue was originally submitted as part of Issue #084, Formal package parameters seen as instantiations. Issue #084 was split into this issue and Issue #087, Add generic_renaming_declarations parameters to Corresponding_Declaration/Body. This issue deals with A_Formal_Package_Declaration[_With_Box] being also considered as instantiations. This implies some modifications to Corresponding_Declaration/Body, at least. Note that for the application I am developping, I do not need to get the expanded spec/body of formal packages. But I need the "reverse", i.e., if I have occurences in the generic template of references to entities declared in some of the "expanded" formal package parameters, I need to determine which is the corresponding formal package. For that purpose, I would like to use Enclosing_Element till I reach the formal package declaration, like I would do to go from an element that is part of instance back to the corresponding instantiation. That's why I want to be sure formal packages are treated like any other instantiations. BTW, I forgot to mention the "With_Box" possibility in my original mail. To clause 15.26, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Declaration, add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a specification" and add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning the argument declaration": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box To clause 15.27, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Body, add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a body": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box ------- SOLUTION: To clause 15.26, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Declaration, add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a specification": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning the argument declaration": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box To clause 15.27, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Body, add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a body": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box Please let us know if this fully addresses your issue. ------- From leguenne@act-europe.fr Mon Jan 12 11:36:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: from cs.ida.org by cronus.csed.ida.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA29475; Mon, 12 Jan 1998 11:36:44 -0500 Received: from paris.act-europe.fr (leguenne@paris.act-europe.fr [195.25.32.140]) by cs.ida.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17421 for ; Mon, 12 Jan 1998 11:37:47 -0500 (EST) Received: (from leguenne@localhost) by paris.act-europe.fr (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA14716; Mon, 12 Jan 1998 16:39:52 +0100 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 16:39:52 +0100 Message-Id: <199801121539.QAA14716@paris.act-europe.fr> From: Alain Leguennec To: roby@ida.org CC: roby@ida.org, Colket@ACM.Org In-reply-to: <199801072207.RAA17566@cronus.csed.ida.org> (roby@ida.org) Subject: Re: Issue #086, Also consider A_Formal_Package_Declaration[_With_Box] as instantiation References: <199801072207.RAA17566@cronus.csed.ida.org> Content-Length: 1011 Status: OR From: roby@ida.org (Clyde Roby) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 17:07:37 -0500 (EST) Cc: roby@ida.org (me), Colket@ACM.Org (Currie Colket) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII << ------- SOLUTION: To clause 15.26, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Declaration, add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a specification": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box >> OK. << add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning the argument declaration": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box >> Here I disagree. Those 2 kinds of declaration cannot be returned unchanged, since the expanded spec must be returned, as mentionned above. This part should be removed. << To clause 15.27, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Body, add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a body": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box >> This part is OK. Regards, -- Alain Le Guennec. From roby Mon Jan 12 14:19:17 1998 Return-Path: Received: by cronus.csed.ida.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA00056; Mon, 12 Jan 1998 14:19:16 -0500 From: roby (Clyde Roby) Message-Id: <199801121919.OAA00056@cronus.csed.ida.org> Subject: Re: Issue #086, Also consider A_Formal_Package_Declaration[_With_Box] as instantiation To: leguenne@act-europe.fr (Alain Leguennec) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 14:19:16 -0500 (EST) Cc: roby (me), Colket@ACM.Org (Currie Colket) In-Reply-To: <199801121539.QAA14716@paris.act-europe.fr> from "Alain Leguennec" at Jan 12, 98 04:39:52 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1014 Status: OR Alain, > << ------- > SOLUTION: > > To clause 15.26, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Declaration, > > add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a specification": > A_Formal_Package_Declaration > A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box > >> > > OK. Great! > << add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning the argument declaration": > A_Formal_Package_Declaration > A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box > >> > > Here I disagree. Those 2 kinds of declaration cannot be returned unchanged, > since the expanded spec must be returned, as mentionned above. > This part should be removed. We weren't too sure about this, so we had put it in as part of the solution -- now we're sure. Thanks again. > << To clause 15.27, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Body, > > add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a body": > A_Formal_Package_Declaration > A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box > >> > > This part is OK. All-right! Thanks again. Clyde and Currie From roby Wed Jan 14 14:48:24 1998 Return-Path: Received: by cronus.csed.ida.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA10025; Wed, 14 Jan 1998 14:48:24 -0500 From: roby (Clyde Roby) Message-Id: <199801141948.OAA10025@cronus.csed.ida.org> Subject: Issue #086, Also consider A_Formal_Package_Declaration(_With_Box) as instantiations To: ASIS-Technical@SW-Eng.Falls-Church.Va.US (ASIS-Technical) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 14:48:24 -0500 (EST) Cc: roby (me), Colket@ACM.Org (Currie Colket) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 812 Status: OR ASIS-Technical, In reference to Issue #086, Also consider A_Formal_Declaration(_With_Box) as instantiations (http://www.acm.org/sigada/wg/asiswg/issues/issue085.i), the attached solution is proposed. Please review this issue and proposed solution and identify any additional changes that are necessary and any alternative solutions and send them to ASIS-Technical. Clyde and Currie ------- To clause 15.26, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Declaration, add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a specification": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box To clause 15.27, Asis.Declaration.Corresponding_Body, add to "Appropriate Declaration_Kinds returning a body": A_Formal_Package_Declaration A_Formal_Package_Declaration_With_Box -------