Tobias Reiher

> I think this can be closed as the problem was addressed in #1067. I don't see how #1067 addresses the problem of this design ticket. With the implementation of...

@rami3l The example just shows one example for disabling style checks on a block level. The description of O2 explicitly mentions that the checks could also be disabled for single...

I cannot think of a valid use case either. We should reject such conditions.

As the message shown above is still accepted as valid, we still have to add a check which rejects such specifications.

@sttaft Thanks for your input! > FWIW, the list comprehension syntax does not match that provided by Ada 2022 "filters" -- filters use "when M.Alg = Request_Alg" rather than "if...

@rami3l Here are some pointers for implementing this feature: The RecordFlux parser needs to be extended. There is already a `Not` token, but the `expression` and `extended_expression` grammar rules do...

I'm not convinced that allowing incomplete messages in a session specification would be a good idea. For the described use case, you would also have to allow passing incomplete messages...

You are right, the current way how inner messages are represented could be quite bad for the code size. `Signed_Message` would essentially a copy of `Unsigned_Message` with one additional field....

As we don't have a specific use case for private types, I would be in favor of removing them.

Should be solved by #1145.