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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,114e43c851a0cefb
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: AG <ang@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Warning in generic instantiation
Date: 1999/05/10
Message-ID: <373655C9.40539E09@xtra.co.nz>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 476043180
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <3734BB9E.F51ED23B@xtra.co.nz>
Organization: The Internet Group Ltd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-05-10T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I realize I posted that on the weekend, but there were
quite a few postings since. So, could some of the language
experts comment on the following:


AG wrote:

> Could somebody comment on the following warning
> I get from ObjectAda compiler (7.1.105) when trying
> that:
>
> generic
>  size: positive;
>  type item is (<>);
> procedure matcher;
>
> procedure matcher is
>  type set is array(0..size-1) of item;
>  type unit is record
>     what: set;    --  *** 1
>     end record;
> begin
>  null;
> end;
>
> with matcher;
> procedure start is
>  type unit is (a, b, c);
>  size: positive;
> begin
>     declare
>   procedure match is new matcher(size, unit); -- *** 2
>     begin
>   null;
>     end;
> end;
>
> The warning I get at line ***2 is:
>
> LRM:13.3(16),Object does not have a meaningful address,
> returning a null address
>
> My questions about that:
>
> 1. I don't quite see how 13.3(16) is applicable since I don't
> directly use anything mentioned there. Is there something
> implicit involved?
>
> 2. If line ***1 is replaced with NULL, the warning goes
> away. So is the warning due to finalising "set" or due to
> declaring "unit"?
>
> 3. Generally, what's wrong with the above usage? After
> all, those types are declared locally or does it matter?
>
> 4. Also, it was only a warning so the program compiles
> and links and runs with no run-time errors even if I declare
> and use objects of "unit" type. So, what was the warning
> all about?
>
> Thanks,
> AG