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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c3f4071dbfa958f
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!h13g2000yqm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Phil Thornley <phil.jpthornley@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Question about SPARK flow error.
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <381eb3e7-71e2-4405-85bd-c02b7e41b44e@h13g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
References: <4c1cf6a3$0$30803$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net>
 <fd3e54b4-bff0-470a-8409-f48c3289a2f3@x27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
	<884g9oF462U1@mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.177.171.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1276975452 29041 127.0.0.1 (19 Jun 2010 19:24:12
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:24:12 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: h13g2000yqm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=80.177.171.182;
	posting-account=Fz1-yAoAAACc1SDCr-Py2qBj8xQ-qC2q
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR
	3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:12794
Date: 2010-06-19T12:24:12-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 19 June, 19:23, "Gavino" <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Phil Thornley" <phil.jpthorn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:fd3e54b4-bff0-470a-8409-f48c3289a2f3@x27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > One way to get rid of the error is to introduce a 'Local_Index' that
> > is set in the loop; then set Index to that value after the loop if
> > Found is True (and your existing code if False).
>
> Doesn't that just push the flow error onto Local_Index?
> After all, the loop body itself may (in principle) never be executed.

Ummm, yes, you're probably right :-(

(Just shows that I should have stuck to my normal policy of not
pronouncing on what the Examiner will do without checking it first on
real code).

Cheers,

Phil