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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9a7e0c43216f4def
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dennison@telepath.com
Subject: Re: "out" or "access"
Date: 1998/10/30
Message-ID: <71cjab$ka8$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 406666675
References: <908956499.754394@dedale.pandemonium.fr>
 <F16K5L.F2B.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com> <70mo3h$gll$1@cf01.edf.fr>
 <wccn26ggo1i.fsf@world.std.com> <m37lxk4890.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>
 <wcc3e87hrl8.fsf@world.std.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x13.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Oct 30 14:43:23 1998 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.05 [en] (WinNT; I)
Date: 1998-10-30T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <wcc3e87hrl8.fsf@world.std.com>,
  Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com> wrote:

> But how about this workaround: declare New_Iterator to take an 'in'
> parameter of type Root_Queue.  (Presuming you really do want an iterator
> that can't modify the thing it's iterating over.)  So it's dispatching,
> which you want.  Inside the various overridings of it, you will normally
> have to do 'Unchecked_Access to produce a pointer to the thing, which

I must be missing something here. Isn't it possible that taking an
'Unchecked_Access of an in parameter will just give you a pointer to a copy of
the object on the stack, which will disappear when the procedure ends? Or are
you saying to do a ".all'Unchecked_Access" on the in parameter?

--
T.E.D.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own