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-Thread: 103376,4894bc8fcf637af8
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.germany.com!storethat.news.telefonica.de!telefonica.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:48:13 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.tsoh+bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Interfaces and private types
References: <fnl2in$k49$1@news2.u-psud.fr> <fnlmms$28q$1@jacob-sparre.dk>
 <fnmruc$ive$1@news2.u-psud.fr>
In-Reply-To: <fnmruc$ive$1@news2.u-psud.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <479f208d$0$27200$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 29 Jan 2008 13:48:13 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: cd6fb858.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=IHVB]CBK3JJE4ZB2flKORAic==]BZ:afN4Fo<]lROoRAFl8W>\BH3YBARBR<UVh1]O;9OJDO8_SKFNSZ1n^B98iJFA1oHl[lKgJ
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19650
Date: 2008-01-29T13:48:13+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Philippe Tarroux schrieb:
> Randy Brukardt wrote:
>> Specifically, it violates 7.3(7.3/2): "the partial view shall be a
>> descendant of an interface type (see 3.9.4) if and only if the full 
>> type is
>> a descendant of the interface type."
>>   As written, this is illegal because type T does not have the 
>> interface Int.
> As it is written the compiler i use doesn't mention any error and i 
> interpreted this construct as legal because :
> 
> 1/ the interface is synchronized thus allowing to derive concurrent or 
> non concurrent types
> 2/ The partial view is a descendant of the interface type
> 3/ The full view precises that the partial view correspond to a 
> concurrent type but hides this detail to the user

I'd rather think that the compiler should diagnose conflicting
declaration of T in the private part as the private T does not
declare a relation with the public T.


If you do not want to derive T publicly, why not

package Test_Interfaces is

   type Int is synchronized interface;
   procedure Init (I : in out Int) is abstract;

   type T is limited private;

private

   task type T is new Int with
      overriding entry Init;
   end T;
end Test_Interfaces;