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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,c6acbb9f2027b8c9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "REH" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: volatile vs aliased Date: 5 Oct 2005 13:02:36 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1128542556.356635.96060@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> References: <1128525722.605730.281980@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <87mzlnomca.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <1128537566.929419.121660@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <874q7voigp.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.91.173.42 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1128542561 14458 127.0.0.1 (5 Oct 2005 20:02:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:02:41 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <874q7voigp.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> User-Agent: G2/0.2 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=192.91.173.42; posting-account=lnUIyw0AAACoRB2fMF2SFTIilm8F10q2 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5424 Date: 2005-10-05T13:02:36-07:00 List-Id: Ludovic Brenta wrote: > Why do you have to use a generic? Why not just: > > procedure Call_Procedure (At_Address : in System.Address) is > procedure Proc; > for Proc'Address use At_Address; > begin > Proc; > end Call_Procedure; I was just trying to by lazy, and not do that everytime. If I have to, I have to. > > I don't know how you could call a procedure with unknown parameters. > Or perhaps you mean with one known parameter which is the address of > a record containing arbitrary parameters? The caller would know. What I don't know to do (and probably can't) is define a generic that can be instantiated using *any* access type, even one to a subprogram. I guess I am spending more time trying to avoid work, than just doing it. REH