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,aba1514f4a1fc450
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.66.84.68 with SMTP id w4mr1563840pay.29.1345990228626;
        Sun, 26 Aug 2012 07:10:28 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 t10ni62970945pbh.0!nntp.google.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.snarked.org!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!ihnp4.UCSD.Edu!nntp.ucr.edu!solaris.cc.vt.edu!news.vt.edu!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Have the Itanium critics all been proven wrong?
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:21:27 +0100
Message-ID: <CC5AB787.1BE95%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
References: <5021874F.1747D0BF@sonic.net> <1e1tf9-0kp2.ln1@ntp6.tmsw.no>
 <k0gn5r$l9h$1@needham.csi.cam.ac.uk> <GPRWr.31944$Bw1.31300@newsfe05.iad>
 <k0gq97$li8$1@needham.csi.cam.ac.uk> <k0h6ef$jke$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <46f19bfc-930e-4f06-b5a6-c60f39cfda0c@p14g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
 <k0r609$4ij$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <077b12f6-1196-4b5c-bbdb-04291b1ae616@q22g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>
 <k0rree$lkn$1@speranza.aioe.org> <CC5730C5.1BC2E%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
 <k0t67b$b8r$1@speranza.aioe.org> <CC585119.1BCCC%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
 <k0uenp$fbg$1@speranza.aioe.org> <k0vo9u$fer$1@dont-email.me>
 <589825d2-d998-456a-9c37-c8ae13e1e7bc@e29g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
 <k10tdr$nm6$1@dont-email.me>
 <bb4e5231-142b-437c-8c2a-bbd6daf34df8@g2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>
 <k12jul$t5q$1@dont-email.me>
 <eddaeeee-8cfa-402e-964a-e795c4590dbe@q22g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>
 <k12shq$4ii$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: individual.net
 Ua8A51uWczrksVGaRVtmMQVrK/XksuJBdNRfIMTZJo/gf/I2Py0Tzt6iQarFnxCeSI
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jvsoZPVd0Bj3+HQFcTjEfivovBY=
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.33.0.120411
Thread-Topic: Have the Itanium critics all been proven wrong?
Thread-Index: Ac2AecxDkLGhSD702Um5BFCOnFI1WA==
X-Received-Bytes: 3286
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-08-22T16:21:27+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 22/08/2012 16:06, in article k12shq$4ii$1@dont-email.me, "Brian Drummond"
<brian@shapes.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 07:00:31 -0700, Michael S wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 22, 3:39�pm, Brian Drummond <br...@shapes.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 03:32:00 -0700, Michael S wrote:
> 
> [... discussion of private types exported to module A from B]
>>> This puts B in charge of the object lifetimes; if A wants to access a
>>> stale object, expect an exception.
>> 
>> Exception, if I am lucky.
>> If I am less lucky, the physical place of old auto object is now
>> occupied by new auto object of the same or compatible type and the call
>> to accessor caused silent corruption.
> 
> If a module has exported a pointer to an "auto object" then the
> accessibility checks have been circumvented by unchecked_access or
> unchecked_conversion. In which case ... yes, caveat programmer!
> 
> Pointers passed from a module will generally be to static or dynamic
> objects. Which, if dynamic, can be freed by unchecked_deallocation.
> Again : caveat programmer.

Worth pointing out that access types /cannot/ point to auto objects unless
declared as "access all", and in Ada it is unusual to do so, as pointers to
non-heap objects are very much less needed than in other languages.

-- 
Bill Findlay
with blueyonder.co.uk;
use  surname & forename;