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 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,29fe9a340e0d180d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) Subject: Re: Depending on passing mechanism Date: 1997/10/17 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 281341430 References: <622b4t$nhe$1@gonzo.sun3.iaf.nl> Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA. Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-10-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) writes: > My paper (ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/LimitedRobbery.html) shows > how copy-in, copy-out semantics violates the notion of limited private > types, and is therefore a dangerous idea. > I don't expect to change anyone's mind, but you should be aware that > Ada has serious flaws that are visible to those outside the Ada community, > although (apparently) are not visible to those within the community. Ada 95 RM 6.2(4..10): "A type is a _by-reference_ type if it is a descendent of one of the following: ... a nonprivate type with the reserved word limited in its declaration; a composite type with a subcomponent of a by-reference type; a private type whoes full type is a by-reference type; A parameter of a by-reference type is passed by reference..." To everyone other than Henry Baker this says that there is no problem of copy-in copy-out semantics in Ada 95 for limited private types since it isn't allowed. -- Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...