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: a07f3367d7,5d4ade2fd8fd67c6
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!feeder.news-service.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Legit Warnings or not
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 16:41:30 +0200
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <1a259uy924xfx.1ajyj4ot8cv26.dlg@40tude.net>
References: 
 <531193e0-3305-4292-9ed8-0176226c1d00@x12g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
 <j086nn$aau$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <j08sp2$8qi$2@dont-email.me>
 <1rx6dwrxmc81p.eazb4fjqztox$.dlg@40tude.net> <j0d52c$qq2$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <bvr7wfbofhal$.10mess7c3uv9j.dlg@40tude.net> <j0nbbi$qms$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <1hi6gva8jhf7o.tq1yp29jn3qu.dlg@40tude.net> <j0qb16$rah$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <go2nk5b4odfy.fpdttridydu6$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wccbowexz6j.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: FbOMkhMtVLVmu7IwBnt1tw.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:21370
Date: 2011-07-28T16:41:30+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:22:28 -0400, Robert A Duff wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> 
>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 19:37:55 -0500, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> 
>>> All of the other things are high-level concepts which work the same whether 
>>> or not the objects are contiguous. ":=" and "=" are defined in terms of the 
>>> subcomponents,
>>
>> which is ambiguous when components are referential. Does ":=" copy the
>> reference or the target object?
> 
> There's no ambiguity.  "X := Y;" copies all components of Y.
> If the compiler chooses to implement some of those components
> via some sort of indirection, then ":=" will need to do a deep copy,
> in general.

So the compiler is not allowed to do reference counting with cloning upon
update?

> The indirection must be invisible (except, as you mentioned, for
> low-level stuff like 'Size and Unchecked_Conversion).

I.e. it leaks.

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