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: a07f3367d7,fdbf6f8330ffcbf5
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!w30g2000prj.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Odd/Broken behavior DOTNET-GNAT vs GNAT regarding tagged types.
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:22:53 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <8f6d51ed-69f9-4e76-a03e-b5601aa714e1@w30g2000prj.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <512951a6-bcc3-4c1a-a5ce-5bd3402d7143@j25g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1287764574 24150 127.0.0.1 (22 Oct 2010 16:22:54
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 16:22:54 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: w30g2000prj.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122;
 posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; WOW64;
 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: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14680
Date: 2010-10-22T09:22:53-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Oct 21, 8:35=A0pm, Shark8 <onewingedsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey everyone; I just got bit with a bit of a surprise regarding the
> differences in how tagged types are treated by GNAT vs DOTNET-GNAT,
> The output of 'external_tag shows why the behavior of the Ada.Tags
> Package is broken under DOTNET.

Not sure what you're trying to do here, or why this is causing a
problem.  The RM says that the default 'External_Tag is implementation-
defined, so you shouldn't depend on it being a certain value, or else
you should write your own "for Tagged_Base'External_Tag use ..."
clause.  My apologies if you already knew this and had some other
reason for being surprised.

                                  -- Adam

[snip]

> -- .NET output
> ----------------------
> C:\PROGRA~3\TEMPOR~1\testing>tag_error.exe
> External tag for base type: tagged_base_pkg.tagged_base
> External tag for child type: tagged_base_pkg.tagged_child
>
> Tagged child is NOT a decendant.
>
> -- Native output
> ----------------------
> C:\PROGRA~3\TEMPOR~1\testing>tag_error.exe
> External tag for base type: TAGGED_BASE_PKG.TAGGED_BASE
> External tag for child type: TAGGED_BASE_PKG.TAGGED_CHILD
>
> Tagged child is a decendant.