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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!seismo!mcvax!dik
From: dik@mcvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: A Problem With Access Types
Message-ID: <347@zuring.mcvax.cwi.nl>
Date: Sun, 12-Apr-87 11:44:26 EST
Article-I.D.: zuring.347
Posted: Sun Apr 12 11:44:26 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 14-Apr-87 00:05:06 EST
References: <9954@skl-crc.ARPA> <124000003@inmet>
Reply-To: dik@zuring.UUCP (Dik T. Winter)
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <124000003@inmet> callen@inmet.UUCP writes:
 > 
 > Try something like this (but be forewarned that the code is not necessarily
 > going to be portable):
Nor is it going to be fool-proof.
 > 
 > with Unchecked_Conversion;
 > with System;
 > ...
 >      type A_REC is
 >        record
 >           ...
 >        end;
 > 
 >      type A_ACCESS is access A_REC;
 > 
 >      function Make_Pointer is new Unchecked_Conversion(
 >        SOURCE=>System.Address, TARGET=>A_ACCESS);
 > 
 >      A : A_REC;
 >      A_A : A_ACCESS;
Ah, yes, the pointer to the stack.  Note however that your contents
might get lost while youre pointer still exists.  (And no, you do
not need UNCHECKED_DEALLOCATION; the contents will deallocate
themselves.)
Useful?  Maybe.
Portable?  Probably yes.
Advisable?  Definitely no.
-- 
dik t. winter, cwi, amsterdam, nederland
INTERNET   : dik@cwi.nl
BITNET/EARN: dik@mcvax