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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,92a6dd552088ca30
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Rego, P." <pvrego@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Constructor for a class with a task defined
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 08:18:17 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <438414c7-9b01-44ef-8a17-f21d4ef34f58@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <dc23e007-fd67-41c4-a00b-1c137961b4a0@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>
 <m2r540efjn.fsf@pushface.org>
Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@googlegroups.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 187.56.110.1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1315063889 933 127.0.0.1 (3 Sep 2011 15:31:29 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 15:31:29 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <m2r540efjn.fsf@pushface.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=187.56.110.1;
 posting-account=TRgI1QoAAABSsYi-ox3Pi6N-JEKKU0cu
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20839
Date: 2011-09-03T08:18:17-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I tried all the suggestions (thanks to all!), but the ones which uses "<>" I got the message box when I included other constructor subclasses inside Small_Class (but worked pretty well in the simpler version):
raised TYPES.UNRECOVERABLE_ERROR : comperr.adb:423
gnatmake: "D:\src\mypkg.adb" compilation error

The one suggested by Simon worked as well too (and it was which I choose to use), but maybe a basic question: what is the difference between using the direct access approach in a local procedure and using the _P approach? I mean, before I had tried to use

   function Construct return access Small_Class is
      B : access Small_Class := new Small_Class;
   begin
      return B;
   end Construct;

and got the message "cannot convert local pointer to non-local access type"

so why does the (type Small_Class_Acc is access all Small_Class;) code 

   function Construct return access Small_Class is
      B : Small_Class_Acc := new Small_Class;
   begin
      return B;
   end Construct;

works? Should not it get me the same msg?