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-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,aaf4cd5313f652b1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-01-24 16:07:03 PST
Path: 
 pad-thai.cam.ov.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!hookup!news.mathworks.com!udel!gatech!swrinde!pipex!uunet!panix!cmcl2!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!nobody
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: type is access cf type is access all?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 09:32:45 -0500
Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
Message-ID: <3g332d$jpp@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
References: <1995Jan20.114005.8916@vax.sbu.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gnat.cs.nyu.edu
Date: 1995-01-24T09:32:45-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

A check of this idea with GNAT ...

We are flattered that when you find a discrepancy between the RM and GNAT
you worry who is right, but I really think you should assume it is the
RM in all cases :-)

In particular, GNAT has only recently implemented the check that disallows
the use of 'Access to produce pool specific access types. Version 2.01
to be released very shortly we hope (next day or two), has this check,
with error messages that point out the need to use ALL.