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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5f3fcf3eb242e4c1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-18 02:38:41 PST
Message-ID: <3B5558A5.716BF610@amsjv.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:36:37 +0100
From: Philip Anderson <phil.anderson@amsjv.com>
Organization: Alenia Marconi Systems ISD
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: casecrash: language lawyers: C'mon!
References: <9j1cpn$bis$1@infosun2.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>
 <AF90BB90E03E608D.447DE4CBCE9D9148.37FD9A43DA8A1090@lp.airnews.net>
 <3b553588$1@pull.gecm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: cwmwkn0612.cwmbran.gecm.com
X-Trace: 18 Jul 2001 10:27:18 GMT, cwmwkn0612.cwmbran.gecm.com
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!195.86.7.162!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!shale.ftech.net!news.ftech.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!btnet-peer0!btnet-feed5!btnet!newreader.ukcore.bt.net!pull.gecm.com!cwmwkn0612.cwmbran.gecm.com
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10136
Date: 2001-07-18T10:36:37+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Martin Dowie wrote:
> 
> I think what the original poster is getting at is that it
> would seem perfectly obvious that the case statement is
> referring to the data object called 'H' rather than the
> enumerate 'H', so why can't the language be defined to
> spot this case?

That I think was his question.  But it's not actually the problem the
compiler found, which was the illegal declaration of the object H
(because it is a homograph of the enumeration H).

And that rule is IMHO well-founded, since there are contexts when
writing H would be ambiguous.


Nearer to the original question would be the following:

with Ada.Text_Io; use Ada.Text_Io;
procedure Casecrash is

   package Local is
      type Record_Type is (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, Unknown);
   end Local;

   use Local;

   type Header is
      record
         Id_Letter : Record_Type := Unknown;
      end record;

   H : Header;

begin
   case H.Id_Letter is
      when A =>
         Put ("a");
      when H =>
--H is not static [RM_95 3.8.1(8); 5.4(5)]
--H is not a value of Record_Type
         Put ("h"); -- H conflict, name clash?
                    -- no context resolution?
      when others =>
         Put ("*");
      end case;
end Casecrash;

since H the enumeration literal has been overriden by the H the object,
although the (Rational Apex) compiler is happy with A in this context. 
RM 8.4(10) seems to apply here.


-- 
hwyl/cheers,
Philip Anderson
Alenia Marconi Systems
Cwmbr�n, Cymru/Wales