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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,87da6144401f9a2d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-30 08:44:21 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newshub2.home.com!news.home.com!news1.sttln1.wa.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Mark Lundquist" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: Limited Type Access - Again X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:44:20 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.248.56.237 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news1.sttln1.wa.home.com 1004460260 24.248.56.237 (Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:44:20 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:44:20 PST Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15420 Date: 2001-10-30T16:44:20+00:00 List-Id: Hi Anh, wrote in message news:mailman.1004389122.4372.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org... > Thanks all for your response, specially Mark and Matt. > > Here comes the next question > > type Object is > record > Sem : Binary_Access; > end record; > > Obj_1 : Object; > Obj_2 : Object; > > if Obj_1 /= Obj_2 then > Obj_1 := Obj; > end if; > > This is equivalent to > > if Obj_1.Sem /= Obj_1.Sem then > Obj_1.Sem := Obj_2.Sem; > end if; > > It looks to me that equality and assignment do not make sense at all. Well, they've always made sense before... :-) It sounds like you're thinking that while the two examples above are equivalent, the first one is legal while the second is not. But the second example is perfectly legal -- Binary_Access (from the example in your earlier post) is just an access type, which is non-limited, so there's nothing wrong with the second example. ??? -- mark