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 10.107.59.5 with SMTP id i5mr17076922ioa.31.1509001779165; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 00:09:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.157.91.109 with SMTP id e42mr173746otj.13.1509001779117; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 00:09:39 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.swapon.de!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!k70no60701itk.0!news-out.google.com!p6ni110itp.0!nntp.google.com!l196no61356itl.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 00:09:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2003:c7:83cf:ceaa:85dc:34b2:96fb:e072; posting-account=rmHyLAoAAADSQmMWJF0a_815Fdd96RDf NNTP-Posting-Host: 2003:c7:83cf:ceaa:85dc:34b2:96fb:e072 References: <2be64a8b-5f89-414c-9dcd-433bd5d855a0@googlegroups.com> <97915524-04a8-4954-8ed8-058ad63f529e@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <3278cf35-f19b-441e-8534-200a918b9836@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Alleged GNAT bug From: AdaMagica Injection-Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 07:09:39 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:48595 Date: 2017-10-26T00:09:38-07:00 List-Id: Am Mittwoch, 25. Oktober 2017 19:28:05 UTC+2 schrieb Victor Porton: > AdaMagica wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, 25. Oktober 2017 02:53:26 UTC+2 schrieb A. Cervetti: > >> So I conclude: > >> The error happens at the freezing point, but with gnat-2017 only in the > >> modular version. The code could be legal because it works in the > >> monolithic version, but > > > > I guess you are right. Exporting the last instantiation Finalizer to a > > child makes the program legal. > > By "you are right" you mean "The code could be legal", don't you? > > Or what do you mean? Of course I mean that the problem is the freezing point - your program is illegal. With the proposed change Term.Child, it is legal.