Re: generic with function procedure

[Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com>]

On Wednesday, June 10, 2020 at 2:21:13 AM UTC-6, Gilbert Gosseyn wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 at 6:44:13 PM UTC+2, Shark8 wrote:
> > Now, at this point the compiler cannot do anything more: this is the realm where only the human programmer can tell what to do:
> > — Is it a copy and paste-error creating the functions "g" and "h"? (Were they declared in the form of "f" which is "(v : Real_Vector) return Real;" instead of "(j : Integer; v : Real_Vector) return Real;"?)
> > — Did you perhaps mean to make the formal parameters of denm, "g" and "h", to be "(v : Real_Vector) return Real;" instead of "(j : Integer; v : Real_Vector) return Real;"? (Perhaps being interrupted while refactoring it, and it's stuck in a form intermediate between what you had and what you want.)
> > — Did you forget to make a "g1" and "h1"?
> 
> Apparently the problem is solved when I make the parameter list for f, g, and h the same.
But is it?
Take a look at the first point I raised:
* Is it a copy and paste-error creating the functions "g" and "h"?

IOW, which is appropriate? A function with signature "(v : Real_Vector) return Real;", or a function with signature "(j : Integer; v : Real_Vector) return Real;"?

> It must be a well known fact when using more than one with. However, I missed it.
It doesn't really have to do with WITH, but with (a) the generic's formal declaration, and (b) the functions visible at instantiation... WITH is only relevant here when using it to pull compilation units into visibility, but even that can be blocked/overriden (e.g.) by locally declaring a function of the same name.