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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ab46f8fd8bc30c31
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!feeder.news-service.com!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!newsreader2.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-hp2.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Problems with Scope of aliased Objects
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: 
 <e9b734e0-478a-4849-b821-444cdbdfac2a@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:47:45 +0200
Message-ID: <13vooix3fmbze$.1wiip6d166wim.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Apr 2009 17:47:45 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: d173d49d.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=YPWm_eIR_EFFJ3]dH>I?oEic==]BZ:afN4Fo<]lROoRA^YC2XCjHcbIb_Ia1THOdUKDNcfSJ;bb[EFCTGGVUmh?DLK[5LiR>kgB:DURC3JI^[E
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5467
Date: 2009-04-16T17:47:45+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 06:43:22 -0700 (PDT), patrick.gunia@googlemail.com
wrote:

> I`ve got a question concerning the scope of Ada-variables. I got the
> following situation:
> First Approach:
> - I declare a local variable "A" of type "xy" within the declaration
> part of a procedure
> - the variable-members are set and finally put into an array
> => after leaving the procedure the variables are still accessable
> through the Array which is defined on a higher scope-level

This is wrong because it is not the variables declared in the procedure,
but copies of their values stored in the array elements.
 
> Second Approach:
> Now I want to restructure my code using general Access-Types for the
> declared variables.
> - I declare a variable "refA" as an alias to my variable-type
> "xy" (also in the declaration-part of the procedure)
> - I do the same operations on "refA" I did before on "A"
> - I declare an instance of a general access-type to my variable of
> type "xy" (also in the declaration-part of the procedure)
> - I pass the access-type-Instance into the Array
> => after leaving the function, I get errors during runtime

This makes no sense because of dangling pointers.

> Third Approach:
> My third approach works, but uses Heap-Memory for "A" thus I generate
> the instances dynamically within my procedure and then pass the
> general access-types into my array.

Create an array of pointers initialized by allocated objects.

> Now here�s my explanation for this:
> When leaving the function in my second approach the pointers are still
> avaiable, because they�re passed into the array, but the objects, the
> pointer point to are not, because they�re out of scope and thus
> destroyed. Is this rigth?

Yes, you have dangling pointers.

> Anf if so, what do I have to do, to get my
> second approach running, and not losing my locally declared objects
> after leaving the function.

You have to allocate the objects using 'new':

   type Object is abstract ...;
   type Object_Ptr is access Object'Class;
   procedure Free is
       new Ada.Unchecked_Deallocation (Object'Class, Object_Ptr);

   type Objects_Array is array (Positive range <>) of Object_Ptr;

   procedure Foo (Data : Objects_Array);

       -- Derived types
   type This_Object is new Object with ...;
   type That_Object is new Object with ...;

declare
   Data : Objects_Array := (new This_Object, new That_Object);
begin
   ...
   Foo (Data); -- Deal with the array
   ...
   for I in Data'Range loop
      Free (Data (I)); -- Do not forget to destroy objects
   end loop;
end;

Fourth solution could be to use a container of unconstrained objects or a
container of smart pointers if the objects are limited.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de