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: 103376,43127f177a55dc41 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Received: by 10.42.155.2 with SMTP id s2mr16239899icw.5.1320366642674; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Path: p6ni68252pbn.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!u12g2000vbx.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Adam Beneschan Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: limited allocated classwide types Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 17:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <5477be67-824f-446f-92d6-2aad668deb64@u12g2000vbx.googlegroups.com> References: <0ed43f83-40e7-46d3-8cc4-e1c41f500d28@c1g2000vbw.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1320366642 1923 127.0.0.1 (4 Nov 2011 00:30:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 00:30:42 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: u12g2000vbx.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: ARLUEHNKC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; Trident/4.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30618; .NET4.0C),gzip(gfe) Xref: news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18818 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2011-11-03T17:30:42-07:00 List-Id: On Nov 3, 4:35=A0pm, Simon Belmont wrote: > > More vexxing is that I can alter what happens in the presumably > incorrect case simply by adding, removing, and reordering the > functions in the spec (which smacks heavily of a mixed up vtable, to > excuse the c++ terminology), which the second response more-or-less > supports. Although there's no official Ada terminology, I think, a paragraph in the AARM calls it the "dispatch table". We Ada people tend to prefer readable English over incomprehensible abbreviations. > Though it is satisfying to hear that this is most likely a compiler > error, and not poor programming skills on my part, I can't help but > feel unnerved by this. =A0I am only months into being an Ada programmer > and not trying to anything that isn't well described and ostensibly > supported, so it seems odd that such a basic test case would uncover > and compiler bug. =A0Moreover, one of the points of pride is that Ada > compilers are heavily tested and verified for safety critical apps, > which this seems to undercut. =A0Not to sound snarky, but I personally > have never found a bug in a GPL C compiler. You haven't run into any number of bugs that get dismissed as "Duplicate of Bug 323", I guess. Like http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug= .cgi?id=3D12331 which is something I ran into some years ago. > In either case, just to confirm, this is the "correct" way to code > this? I don't know if this is the best way without knowing more about what your entire program. But I don't see anything wrong with it. It's probably correct enough. -- Adam