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,b0a828f417615ded
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Compiler Bug
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 14:54:22 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <24d8f3b3-8406-4bc2-8908-f85c84a4bd69@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <9f4bc0eb-d44a-43f9-83bd-dd07fa8538f2@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
	<8a6283ea-be44-46d7-a2f1-a6d626266b58@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>
	<97d0825d-ee08-45ef-b736-ca005caf1a81@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
	<fj4l3o$kjv$1@jacob-sparre.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1196808862 7574 127.0.0.1 (4 Dec 2007 22:54:22
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 22:54:22 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122;
	posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.12)
	Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.7.12-1.3.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Content-Disposition: inline
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18712
Date: 2007-12-04T14:54:22-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Dec 4, 2:45 pm, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote:
> "REH" <spamj...@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
>
> news:97d0825d-ee08-45ef-b736-ca005caf1a81@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > No, I can't, sorry.  But the gist of it is:
>
> > function F1 return T1;
> > pragma Inline(F1);
>
> > function F1 return T1 is
> >   R : T1;
> > begin
> >   -- do stuff
> >   return R;
> > end F1;
>
> > function F2 return T2 is
> >   V : T1 := F1;
> >   R : T2;
> > begin
> >   -- do stuff
> >   return R;
> > end F2;
>
> > The compiler and debugger treat the R in F2 as if it is of type T1,
> > not T2.  Exceeding the bounds of T1 cause F2 to raise a
> > constraint_error.  The problem goes away if the pragma inline is
> > removed.
>
> The way you describe it, it sounds like a compiler bug. But without seeing
> the actual code, it is impossible to tell for sure. (It's not unusual for a
> compiler-bug-reporter to see one problem when something totally different is
> going on -- it even happens to me from time-to-time.) Ada's visibility rules
> are complex enough that you could be getting some other kind of conflict
> without realizing it.

Right... but pragma Inline isn't supposed to affect the visibility
rules at all.  So no matter what he's doing, if he's actually seeing a
case where a program with an Inline pragma raises a Constraint_Error,
and removing the pragma (without doing anything else to the program)
causes the Constraint_Error to go away, then I can't think of any way
that this could happen with a correct compiler.  (That's not true in
reverse, by the way... there are legitimate cases when adding an
Inline pragma could make a Constraint_Error go away, if an optimizer
determines that some of the inlined code can be eliminated for a
particular call.  But adding an Inline pragma should never make a
Constraint_Error appear that didn't appear before, I don't think.)

                            -- Adam