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,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,939bba6defed3e0d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Stephen Arnold <arnold.steve@ensco.com>
Subject: Re: problem solved (and now I know why)
Date: 2000/04/14
Message-ID: <38F790EE.2273B508@ensco.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 611286658
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8d7n1a$ee6@journal.concentric.net>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-04-14T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Well, I've learned alot today :)

Thanks to some help from Julian Day (what is your real name anyway?) I
figured out my problem (but there's still a problem on the windoze
platform...)

In my original Remove procedure, I had a call to Clear to clear the list
when it only contained a single element.  However, after Clear freed the
memory for the single list element, and set the list pointers to null,
it jumped back to Remove, which tried to free the same memory.  Again
(not good).  So now, with 20-20 hindsight, it's obvious why my code
barfed on Linux.  That's exactly what it *should've* done.

However, one question remains:  Why did windoze not catch this problem? 
My original (and incorrect) code runs just fine on win95, win98, and
even NT4 (which my instructor uses).  The original code passed his test
driver with flying colors, and he tests *everything* (including the
Overflow exception).

Is there any way for GNAT to catch this at run-time, or is it completely
up to the OS?  I guess I'll be sticking to Linux from now on...

Thanks, Steve