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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Prohibiting dynamic allocation for the given type
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 01:24:57 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <89ac4348-4c21-478e-b491-97bfbebfdb86@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <83335709-e099-416b-9967-5ab6aa0aea11@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
	<bbf57cd3-2b37-4a48-8fad-d8ce72968957@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.141.45.252
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1205915098 10650 127.0.0.1 (19 Mar 2008 08:24:58
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:24:58 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=128.141.45.252;
	posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US;
	rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080201 Firefox/2.0.0.12,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20478
Date: 2008-03-19T01:24:57-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 19 Mar, 04:06, gp...@axonx.com wrote:

> Ada is high level language

That does not matter.
Ada is a high level language, but still provides two ways to create an
object:

X : Type;
Y : Type_Ptr := new Type;

If these two methods are available, then apparently there is a
difference between them and this difference is not in *where* objects
are created, but *how long* they are allowed to live.

The high-level part of Ada can hide the "where" part, but not "how
long".

For some types I might want to prohibit one of these two ways of
object creation.

Prohibiting the first one is easy with limited types that have unknown
discriminants + factory functions that return pointers.

Prohibiting the second one seems to be impossible.
For me this is a limitation.

> What's wrong with good old comments atop of type declaration.

What's wrong with C with good comments? :-)

> But if you insist you may do run-time check by
> defining custom Storage_Pool pool for your object

Storage_Pool is a property of the pointer, not the type.

--
Maciej Sobczak * www.msobczak.com * www.inspirel.com