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=3.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	RATWARE_MS_HASH,RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,da74d35864a7d542
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Bob Klungle" <bklungle@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Discriminant as default initial value
Date: 1997/03/30
Message-ID: <01bc3d56$6bf79240$74fd1fcc@p5120.bda>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 229511278
References: <333DB640.59EA@sirinet.net>
Organization: B & D Associates
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Mar 30  2:02:07 PM PST 1997
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-30T14:02:07-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


> 
> I'm new to Ada and have scoured the FAQ, RM, and Rationale, but haven't
> found an answer to my question that I understand.
> 
> I want to use a discriminant in a record as both a bound in the index
> constraint of a component declaration and as a default initial value. 
> I'm not sure that this is allowed by the RM.
> 
> The following example, while contrived, exhibits behavior that I
> definitely do not understand.  Using GNAT 3.09 for NT with Max defined
> before the Position Matrix, the component record is initialized as
> expected.  When Max is defined after the Position Matrix within the
> record, Max is initialized to a large value that is not even within the
> subtype's range.  No exception is raised.
> 
> Is this expected behavior?  Is it permissible to use the same
> discriminant as both an index bound and a default initial value?  Should
> the behavior change when the order of declaration within the record
> changes?

Scott, I built your example on GNAT3.08/Linux and it worked OK.
Maybe NT. Have NT version installed but having trouble making it work.

bob