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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9ce5fb49dc74582f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "markww" <markww@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: generic question
Date: 20 Nov 2006 13:16:21 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1164057381.185544.143140@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
References: <1163959439.299036.129940@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>
   <87mz6nnt4v.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
   <20061119202320.19149a2f@cube.tz.axivion.com>
   <4560D5BE.5060508@obry.net>
   <4sdejbFuovi3U1@mid.individual.net>
   <4561DFF8.5000904@obry.net>
   <4se99nFv3ba7U1@mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.154.89.221
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1164057386 16634 127.0.0.1 (20 Nov 2006 21:16:26
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:16:26 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <4se99nFv3ba7U1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1;
 .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=67.154.89.221;
   posting-account=cNKOMg0AAADT2ug8oGSYYXo8bsDvrHzw
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7588
Date: 2006-11-20T13:16:21-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hi all,

I was planning on having each node use the same generic type once
instantiated. I am still new with Ada, but thought it would work
similarly to C++:

    vector<CMyClassType> vMyVector;

now this instance of the vector can only contain type CMyClassType.

Thanks,
Mark

On Nov 20, 1:10 pm, "Alex R. Mosteo" <devn...@mailinator.com> wrote:
> Pascal Obry wrote:
> > Alex R. Mosteo a =E9crit :
> >> Isn't enough to have a wrapper access type at the point of deallocatio=
n?
> >> Or are some scope rules preventing this?
>
> > Yes and no. The anonymous access types and named access types won't use
> > the same memory pool. So doing this will not be portable. I think it
> > will work with current compilers though...If I'm not mistaken, point 13=
.11.2(16) would make it not even not portable
> but indeed erroneous. Unless you use a named access type for the initial
> allocation and the final deallocation. Admittedly I'm not very sure of any
> of this.