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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,45c4e8c210d7ef0d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!p13g2000yqc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Egil_H=F8vik?= <egilhovik@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Another problem with "interface"
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 03:45:42 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <08268d1a-3347-47ce-ac70-0872fe0b9faa@p13g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
References: <mJednUhUY_4tqgTUnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet>
	<77ad6c6e-0830-4f0d-8a04-84be0fe9504c@33g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
	<49994281$0$31336$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <X4adnZN39usr0ATUnZ2dnUVZ8r2dnZ2d@posted.plusnet>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.71.180.107
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1234784742 26070 127.0.0.1 (16 Feb 2009 11:45:42
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 11:45:42 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: p13g2000yqc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=193.71.180.107;
	posting-account=P68zsgoAAABKpXKMUuwuUZ_RfBk1kZfB
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.2; .NET CLR
	1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3654
Date: 2009-02-16T03:45:42-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Feb 16, 12:27=A0pm, Robert_Matthews <igno...@ramatthews.free-
online.co.uk> wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> > Uhm, I think that, still, you can call functions
> > that will assign the (already existing) return
> > objcect. Which was, IIUC, the point of coining the
> > word "constructor function".
>
> > =A0 X: constant New_A_T :=3D Set_A;
>
> >http://www.adacore.com/2007/05/28/gem-3/
>
> Indeed, that is my intent.
> Note that if I use an ordinary record type, e.g.
>
> =A0type New_A_Type is new A_Type with ...
>
> then GNAT compiles things OK; it is when
> I use a protected type it complains.
>
> Robert

Actually, it is when the protected type inherits an interface it
complains.
For me, at least, (using Gnat Pro 6.1.2) removing the inheritance
compiles OK...