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: a07f3367d7,e276c1ed16429c03
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.141.40.65.MISMATCH!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!news.belwue.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:51:19 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada is getting more popular!
References: <i93mac$73v$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <bbe0c03c-6afd-40de-bf9e-04aa04b53504@n7g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <bbe0c03c-6afd-40de-bf9e-04aa04b53504@n7g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4cb5c768$0$6764$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Oct 2010 16:51:20 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: e9ff2fe8.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=;`FhAClZ5O:T2Rfi6<W9f5McF=Q^Z^V384Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;NQZO:=M?`i3nc\616M64>:Lh>_cHTX3j=L9SB54Z2=@7
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:15477
Date: 2010-10-13T16:51:20+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 13.10.10 14:07, ramon_garcia wrote:
> type my_container(counter: integer, discriminated_attribute: integer)
> is record
>    data: array(0..counter) of contained(discriminated_attribute);
> end record;
> 
> This straightforward way is not posible because one cannot use an
> anonymous array type inside a record (by the way, I find this feature
> unjustified).

I think it's justified insofar as you can't have both separate
compilation and dope-free representation of My_Container.

procedure P(Simple : in out My_Container) is

   -- Problem: what's the address of Simple.Data(N)
   -- in case there are no dope vectors?

   Stuff : aliased constant My_Container(42, 27);
   for Stuff'Address use ...;

   type My_Container_Ptr is access My_Container;

   Other_Stuff : My_Container_Ptr;
begin
   Other_Stuff := new My_Container
     (Counter => Input_Func(...),
      Discriminated_Attribute => Input_Func(...));
end P;


Georg