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,bdebc54a485c13a4
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.125.233 with SMTP id mt9mr20224360pbb.5.1332788223032;
        Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 z9ni4639pbe.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: My first compiler bug: work around or redesign?
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <2229037.332.1332788108220.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbht7>
References: <slrnjmp96d.1lme.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
 <slrnjn1ch7.1lme.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.98.68.197
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1332788222 11026 127.0.0.1 (26 Mar 2012 18:57:02
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:57:02 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <slrnjn1ch7.1lme.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=153.98.68.197;
 posting-account=pcLQNgkAAAD9TrXkhkIgiY6-MDtJjIlC
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: 2012-03-26T11:55:08-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Natasha Kerensikova wrote on comp.lang.ada:
> Is it really worth reporting?

Yes, especially if you can craft a small reproducer exposing the bug box.
Now that you know that "not null Named_Access_Type" triggers the bug, that
should be easy.  You've done the hardest part.

> Thinking about it, I'm not even sure my
> code is actually legal: could "not null Element_Renderer" be illegal but
> previously interpreted correctly because of a fluke? Or should it be
> accepted?

IIUC, "not null Element_Renderer" is legal in Ada 2005 and does not
create an anonymous type.  In Ada 95, anonymous types are implicitly
"not null" but named access types are implicitly "null" (i.e. "possibly
null") and there is no way to make them "not null".

> And assuming I should report it, how to so? AdaCore seemed the best
> starting point, but their website isn't exactly straightforward on how
> to be send bug reports. Is there anything better than
> http://libre.adacore.com/libre/contact/  ?

Report it to the FSF at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla. IMHO, a public bug
database is worth a thousand private ones.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.
The project manager deploys scalable Management Information Systems
reaped from our measured efficiency gain.