Re: ObjectAda vs Gnat -- bugs

[bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)]

In article <5lf6ka$nbg@service.polymtl.ca>,
granger <louis.granger@mail.polymtl.ca> wrote:
>Here is a shortened version of a package that I wrote.

Is this supposed to be the obfuscated Ada contest?
I mean, grey vs. bray makes my brain hurt.
                 ^^^^ Of course, I meant to type "gray", but I like the
typo, so I'll leave it in.  ;-)

>It compiles without any error with ObjectAda.
>With gnat3.09, I have the following errors:
>
>rgbcolor.ads:18:41: expect object name in renaming
>rgbcolor.ads:19:49: expect object name in renaming
>
>Which of the compilers is correct ?
>
>If gnat is correct ( probably gnat!!!),

Why do you say "probably gnat"?

>... the internal package RGB_Value does
> not have any influence, how can I have the enumeration values Gray* and
> Grey* of the same type or subtype with the same internal value ?
>
>Thank in advance for any suggestion.
>
>package rgbcolor is
>	package RGB_Value is
>		type Color3  is
>		record
>			red, green, blue : Float;
>		end record;
>		Gray0	: constant Color3 := ( 0.000, 0.000, 0.000 );
>		Grey0	: Color3 renames Gray0;
>		Gray1	: constant Color3 := ( 0.012, 0.012, 0.012 );
>		Grey1	: Color3 renames Gray1;
>	end RGB_Value;
>	
>	type Color_Type is ( Gray0, Gray1 );
>	
>	subtype Grey_Color_Type is Color_Type range Gray0 .. Gray1;
>	
>	Grey0	: Color_Type renames	Gray0;	-- line in error---------------
>	Grey1	: Color_Type renames	Gray1;	-- line in error---------------

This looks legal, to me.  You're renaming calls to the enum lits (which
are like functions, in Ada).  Perhaps you meant to say:

    function Grey0 return Color_Type renames Gray0;
    ... and similarly for gr[ea]y1.

;-)  But either way, it should be legal.

Package RGB_Value has nothing to do with this, as far as I can tell.

- Bob