Re: limited agregate and limited components default initialization

[Jere <jhb.chat@gmail.com>]

On Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 9:16:49 PM UTC-4, Jean-Claude Rostaing wrote:
> Interesting.
> Let's say I get that - not quite done in reality, ITEM_TYPE's formal type
> is "(<>) is limited private", so why giving a default expression -not discriminant- isn't enough to constrain the component's value ?

As I said in my second response, the limited might make it ok (I don't know
for sure now that I think about it), but when I looked at the RM, the section
on discriminants didn't mention limited types.

I thought you meant discriminant.  If you meant expression, I'm not sure.
My apologies!

Can you give a slightly more complete example?  The one earlier was fairly
incomplete.  I couldn't tell what Item_Record type looked like for example.