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: 103376,2843c5eea3415584
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!oleane.net!oleane!freenix!proxad.net!gatel-ffm!gatel-ffm!194.25.134.126.MISMATCH!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail
From: Martin Krischik <martin@krischik.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: APQ
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:53:14 +0100
Organization: None
Message-ID: <2737240.Ctorkcd9f4@linux1.krischik.com>
References: <sa4brcv2l5m.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au>
 <Onewd.204$Wt5.95202@read2.cgocable.net>
 <ydCdnUENQ8wivV_cRVn-sQ@megapath.net> <sa4d5x9si42.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au>
 <GTswd.248$Wt5.145533@read2.cgocable.net>
 <sa41xdpsfnt.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au> <cpu73t$9nr$1@kda-news.kongsberg.com>
 <sa4pt19qhg1.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au> <sa4acscr0vv.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au>
 <qmYwd.366$jT5.52@read1.cgocable.net>
 <1297625.Y25m4Ds50U@linux1.krischik.com>
 <1qdghglptbxd0.4agztqguu8nm.dlg@40tude.net>
Reply-To: martin@krischik.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1103734867 05 15698 s0VZrYr1NbdVSqey 041222
 17:01:07
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@t-online.de
X-ID: ZBp1B2ZUreWhMYPO6c3dNYRuTdxsWW-WPucncWYD3BZPJlLugGLc6d
User-Agent: KNode/0.8.0
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7169
Date: 2004-12-22T17:53:14+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:07:44 +0100, Martin Krischik wrote:
> 
>> Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote:
>> 
>>> I can't imagine it making a practical difference here, but
>>> perhaps I lack imagination on this point.
>> 
>>
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Ada:Types:access#access_vs._access_all
> 
> Pool-specific access types do not do well:
> 
> 1. Upcast/downcast conversions do not work. You'll need
> Unchecked_Conversion of pointers. It is nasty and dangerous.
> 
> 2. '[Unchecked_]Access does not work (otherwise, (1) would be a minor
> problem).
> 
> 3. Rosen's trick does not work. Very bad. Move it to Initialize? That
> won't work either, because of 2.
> 
> 4. Construction/destruction is headache. Wished to insert a newly created
> object into a list? Not from Initialize! To delete it from there upon
> destruction? Nay!
> 
> 5. Access discriminants cannot be pool-specific. Converting to general
> access to specific one is again an Unchecked_Conversion of worst kind.
> 
> 6. There is no way to restrict objects allocations to a definite set of
> pools. "type X (<>) is ..." does not count.
> 
> In general, I think that the issue should be thoroughly reworked.

Well, ist wiki. Klick on [edit] and make your point. It OK by me - actually
it is he hole point of wiki: incremental impovement.

With Regards

Martin
-- 
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
http://www.ada.krischik.com