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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.236.207.164 with SMTP id n24mr3278596yho.5.1408032231162;
        Thu, 14 Aug 2014 09:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.50.85.7 with SMTP id d7mr1068238igz.9.1408032231064; Thu, 14
 Aug 2014 09:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!j15no7146068qaq.0!news-out.google.com!px9ni588igc.0!nntp.google.com!h18no20243809igc.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 09:03:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <lsi86s$hqg$1@speranza.aioe.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=66.126.103.122;
 posting-account=KSa2aQoAAACOxnC0usBJYX8NE3x3a1Xq
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
References: <lsgi0c$q2j$1@speranza.aioe.org> <lybnrnlcy8.fsf@pushface.org>
 <lsi86s$hqg$1@speranza.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <16a948da-f477-45a2-a6dd-be1d8c19f1d4@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Intermixing two tagged types
From: Adam Beneschan <adambeneschan@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 16:03:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Received-Bytes: 1838
X-Received-Body-CRC: 737355257
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:21758
Date: 2014-08-14T09:03:50-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thursday, August 14, 2014 4:57:18 AM UTC-7, Victor Porton wrote:

> Tagged types a little decrease efficiency, but I use tagged types anyway 
> (primarily for controlled finalization).

I haven't been following this discussion carefully enough.  So I have no idea whether the following suggestion is appropriate.  However ...

If you have an untagged record, and it has a component that is a (tagged) controlled type, you'll still get finalization, but using the untagged record as a parameter won't cause any problems with the dispatching rules.

Again, I don't know whether this is helpful.  I just thought I'd throw it out there in case it is.

                                  -- Adam