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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,75ce2ead897158b2
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.224.157.1 with SMTP id z1mr519745qaw.8.1364508392011;
        Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.49.4.68 with SMTP id i4mr26945qei.15.1364508391987; Thu, 28
 Mar 2013 15:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 v17ni9qad.0!nntp.google.com!ca1no15227338qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <25ee066d-3270-4efd-829f-ed40b04c0655@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=149.32.224.34;
 posting-account=Qh2kiQoAAADpCLlhT_KTYoGO8dU3n4I6
NNTP-Posting-Host: 149.32.224.34
References: <0c77e832-e12b-446d-af24-78d77c358f1e@googlegroups.com>
 <25ee066d-3270-4efd-829f-ed40b04c0655@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <627f8c74-f316-44c2-a189-3d549db7e06e@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: My bug or else regarding Visibility Rules
From: Anh Vo <anhvofrcaus@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 22:06:32 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: 2013-03-28T15:06:31-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thursday, March 28, 2013 1:58:33 PM UTC-7, Adam Beneschan wrote:
>> On Thursday, March 28, 2013 12:54:26 PM UTC-7, Anh Vo wrote: 
>> For the codes below GNAT complains that In_Index, Buffer, and Out_Index 
>> are undefined. However, if I comment out private key word, GNAT is happy.
>> Did I violate Ada syntax rules? Thanks. 

> 13.1.1(11): The usage names in an aspect_definition [ are not resolved at the > point of the associated declaration, but rather] are resolved at the end 
> of the immediately enclosing declaration list. 
> In your example, the "immediately enclosing declaration list" ends at the 
> keyword PRIVATE when that keyword is present; but if you take it out, the
> declaration list ends at "end Circular_Queue;". -- Adam
 
I understand it now. Thank you Adam for your help. By the way, I have decided to move these data into the body event though I will lose parts of Postcondition checking.

AVo