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: a07f3367d7,57f8540942f8e060
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hibou57_=28Yannick_Duch=EAne=29?=
 <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Initialization and Finalization of limited object "returned" by a
	function
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:35:50 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <0835a8bb-5264-44f8-9b58-1f8cff5f9f0a@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
References: <ed41ec55-1c33-4ea0-95db-01a89103d70a@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
	<wcceikrx0o1.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <d1d2586a-2f70-491a-8a12-01abae4ab6f5@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
	<wcc4olnd1w0.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <75a9f860-ad3c-49a0-b2a1-a8f1386e6ff6@x10g2000prk.googlegroups.com>
	<2801be3a-afd6-4d14-ad7f-feb23a511f02@a5g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
	<a3d5d6c2-cbaa-4ccc-8d3b-46692285ba57@m24g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.66.190.112
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1265942150 25991 127.0.0.1 (12 Feb 2010 02:35:50
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 02:35:50 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.66.190.112;
	posting-account=vrfdLAoAAAAauX_3XwyXEwXCWN3A1l8D
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1;
	fr),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9144
Date: 2010-02-11T18:35:50-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 12 f=E9v, 02:05, Adam Beneschan <a...@irvine.com> wrote:
> Hope this clears things up. =A0If instead I've just created more
> confusion, I apologize and promise to refrain from making things worse
> by trying to explain myself any more.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0-- Adam

You're joking, aren't you ? You did not really though this words ...

Well, the story continues. First of all, I apologize to not have read
all comments so far (not entirely), which will be done whatever.

Here is a second test I've drove, to be really sure about what's going
on.
Here is the plan : start from a simple case, and follow a path to a
similar case to the one which gave the doubts exposed in the initial
post of this thread.

This comes into six simple samples, A to F. Simplified on purpose to
ease quick overview (no more explicit spy, add it yourself if you want
to the check what's asserted).

A single comment in each heading explain the difference of one test
compared to its predecessor, as well the observation made (which I
made with a spy which is dropped from this samples, for the reason
given above). The trouble occurs at step F.

I will post each samples on its own post, to ease quoting (hope this
sequence of six posts will not be too much annoying).

Here we go ...