Re: [commit] Use true boolean types in Ada

[Paul Hilfinger <Hilfinger@adacore.com>]

Eli,  

> Can you suggest a write-up for the manual nonetheless?  I'd like to
> see how obscure is "obscure" in this case.

> Is there any reasonable way of stating the effect of this on
> user-level features?  If so, I'd prefer to at least mention them, if
> not replace the above with them.

Is this more what you have in mind?  If so, I'll commit it:

Index: gdb/NEWS
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/NEWS,v
retrieving revision 1.286
diff -u -p -r1.286 NEWS
--- gdb/NEWS	20 Aug 2008 04:58:34 -0000	1.286
+++ gdb/NEWS	20 Aug 2008 06:47:18 -0000
@@ -59,6 +59,8 @@ conditions handling signals delivered du
 have also been fixed.
 
 * GDB now supports the use of DWARF boolean types for Ada's type Boolean.
+From the user's standpoint, all unqualified instances of True and False
+are treated as the standard definitions, regardless of context.
 
 * New features in the GDB remote stub, gdbserver
 
Index: gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo,v
retrieving revision 1.518
diff -u -p -r1.518 gdb.texinfo
--- gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo	20 Aug 2008 04:57:32 -0000	1.518
+++ gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo	20 Aug 2008 06:47:31 -0000
@@ -11218,6 +11218,14 @@ formats are not supported.
 
 @item
 It is not possible to slice a packed array.
+
+@item
+The names @code{True} and @code{False}, when not part of a qualified name, 
+are interpreted as if implicitly prefixed by @code{Standard}, regardless of 
+context.
+Should your program
+redefine these names in a package or procedure (at best a dubious practice),
+you will have to use fully qualified names to access their new definitions.
 @end itemize
 
 @node Additions to Ada