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, LOTS_OF_MONEY,MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,573be8c453ecbff4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ted Dennison Subject: Re: 'Read for pointers Date: 2000/07/27 Message-ID: <8lpeog$gvc$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 651401058 References: <8lndgv$1om$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x66.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Jul 27 13:51:14 2000 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtedennison Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) Date: 2000-07-27T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , "Pat Rogers" wrote: > "Ted Dennison" wrote in message > news:8lndgv$1om$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > The problem is that Item is an *out* parameter. That means I won't > > have acces to the pointer's old value inside Read. There's no way I > Further to my previous post, to the effect that one can indeed read > mode out parameters: the access value of the actual is copied into the > formal, so you get a meaningful value coming in even though the mode > is out. See RM 6.4.1{12,13} Wow. That's one I would not have guessed. So there's effectively no difference between "out" and "in out" for access types, composite types with discriminants, or record types with default field values? %-} -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.