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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5bbcbfbb228d6549
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!club-internet.fr!feedme-small.clubint.net!news.motzarella.org!motzarella.org!not-for-mail
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9bastien?= <seb.morand@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada.Containers.Vectors Update_Element issue
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:01:00 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <482AFEAC.3040306@gmail.com>
References: <g0cj0n$i6o$1@registered.motzarella.org>
 <4bb8bb12-225b-4790-bd12-40ef0b0adeaf@s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: feeder.motzarella.org
 U2FsdGVkX19yKyXe9ty/iTHoQub2UElntV12gwzI3cE0As3YJjHNOvL/HbHS5OB/ND4KyP2u2pgvkbvUsRYAYHQm9JvDOTNYJr2O3qQHVTrqLlTO/TbOYQMlYRnDNU8V25bM7wxtdgO90wImwJVJdQ==
X-Complaints-To: Please send complaints to abuse@motzarella.org with full
 headers
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:00:53 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: 
X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX18cDUjkSMPJz5qDWJWgGqHWnX6X8UOjXyEKzXk2I1yg4A==
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QMIJDvjvepXBESIwP4MTX1IdK24=
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:59
Date: 2008-05-14T15:01:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

  > procedure Update_All (c : in out context) is
>     procedure Do_The_Update (Element : in out Element_Type) is
>     begin
>         My_Update (c, Element);
>     end Do_Update;
> begin
>     my_list.Update_Element (1, Do_The_Update'Access);
> end Update_All;
> 
> I haven't tried this.  However, it should work because the Process
> parameter to Update_Element is declared as an anonymous access-
> procedure type, rather than as a named access-procedure type, and this
> means you can pass a nested procedure access to it without any
> accessibility-level issues.  (This sort of usage is exactly why
> anonymous access-subprograms types were added to Ada 2005.)

Ok I didn't think about nested proc having access to argument. When you 
mean anonymous access, you are meaning "Do_The_Update'Access"? There was 
no procedure access in previous ada version?

Anyway it's working fine.

>> generic
>>    c: Context;
>> procedure My_Update_Generic(Element: in out Element_Type);
>>
>> procedure Update_All(c: in out context) is
>>    procedure My_Update is new My_Update_Generic(c => c);
>> begin
>>         my_list.Update_Element(1, My_Update'Access);
>> end;
>>
>> That's not working and I can understand it ;-) No dynamical address
>> since the generic will instancied at runtime or something like that ...
> 
> Offhand, I *don't* understand why this wouldn't work.  It seems like
> it should.  Is the compiler giving you an error message, or are you
> getting exceptions or bad behavior at runtime?
> 
> But you shouldn't need a generic; the nested procedure solution should
> work fine.

The compiler said it's a bug... However I'm not able to do it again, it 
works fine now but I prefer the method above.