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: 103376,591cbead201d7f34
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Prohibiting dynamic allocation for the given type
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:38:37 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <9ac94db1-01e1-4ce3-81d3-27f8b11f7662@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <83335709-e099-416b-9967-5ab6aa0aea11@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
	<bbf57cd3-2b37-4a48-8fad-d8ce72968957@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1205937517 26047 127.0.0.1 (19 Mar 2008 14:38:37
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:38:37 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122;
	posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.12)
	Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.7.12-1.3.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20488
Date: 2008-03-19T07:38:37-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Mar 18, 8:06 pm, gp...@axonx.com wrote:
> On Mar 18, 5:30 pm, Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homep...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is it possible to "prohibit" dynamic allocation for the given type?
>
> > Let's suppose that I have a type which instances make sense only on
> > the stack.
>
> Ada is high level language and stack is implementation specific
> entity. ARM does not mention how the local objects are allocated (it
> simply irrelevant).  In fact, GNAT uses two stacks for different type
> of objects but users don't have to know these details.
>
> > I want to prohibit users from dynamically allocating
> > instances of this type so that they don't get into troubles.
> > Preferably at compile-time.
>
> What's wrong with good old comments atop of type declaration. Like
> some beverages have: "for most enjoyment serve chilled" or "for best
> performance avoid heap allocation".
>
> Don't know if it's ever possible to do it during compile, nothings
> comes to my mind. But if you insist you may do run-time check by
> defining custom Storage_Pool pool for your object and raising
> exception from Allocate method. See ARM 3.11 for details.

No, you can only specify a Storage_Pool for an *access* type; you
can't specify that "all allocated instances of an object type will go
through such-and-such a Storage_Pool".

                                   -- Adam