Re: have to use unrestricted access but just what about access

["chris.danx" <spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com>]

"Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
news:5ee5b646.0206200805.7c4be786@posting.google.com...


> The referenced post in this thread is an excellent lesson
> in when how to seriously misuse the Unrestricted_Access
> attribute.

I wasn't comfortable with Unrestriced_Access anyway, so the code was changed
it earlier today not to use Unrestricted_Access...

   type Dot_Window
      is new Gwindows.Windows.Main.Main_Window_Type
     with record
        Drawing_Surface : Gwindows.Drawing_Panels.Drawing_Panel_Access :=
null;

        Key_Coordinator : Dot_Key_Coor.Coordinator_Access := null;
        Watcher         : Dot_Key_Watcher.Watcher_Access  := null;
        Builder         : Dot_Builder.Builder_Access      := null;
     end record;

Everything is dynamically allocated and if at any point an allocation fails,
the program is terminated (after tidying up of course)!

If you have a suggestion as to how to improve the mechanism by which the two
tasks communicate I'd gladly listen.

> But even a cursory examination of this code will show
> that it is very likely to generate a dangling pointer.

The tasks which use the protected object are terminated (and deallocated)
before the protected object itself, so there should be no dangling pointer.
I always make a point of noting where anything is allocated and under what
circumstances they should be deallocated.