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: 103376,e9caf8720058dd5e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!out01b.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!in02.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!in03.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com.POSTED!4988f22a!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <1178291081.936739.131740@c35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: embed accept statement in procedures not possible? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.134.100.216 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com 1178310129 ST000 70.134.100.216 (Fri, 04 May 2007 16:22:09 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 16:22:09 EDT Organization: AT&T http://yahoo.sbc.com X-UserInfo1: FKPO@SBEQJV]SQ@[EZOD]_\@VR]^@B@MCPWZKB]MPXHJUZ]CDVW[AKK[J\]^HVKHG^EWZHBLO^[\NH_AZFWGN^\DHNVMX_DHHX[FSQKBOTS@@BP^]C@RHS_AGDDC[AJM_T[GZNRNZAY]GNCPBDYKOLK^_CZFWPGHZIXW@C[AFKBBQS@E@DAZ]VDFUNTQQ]FN Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 13:22:24 -0800 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15543 Date: 2007-05-04T13:22:24-08:00 List-Id: "(see below)" wrote in message news:C26125DB.A99CF%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk... > On 4/5/07 16:04, in article > 1178291081.936739.131740@c35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, "Gerd" > wrote: > >> >> GNAT tells me: "enclosing body for accept must be a task". But - the >> accept in procedure p _is_ in a task. So why is this not allowed? > > Because it is not legal Ada. > See Ada (2005) Reference Manual Section 9.5.1, thus: > Bill is correct in his reply. However, an accept statement is the implementation of an entry at the specification level. And one can rename an entry into a procedure. It is not likely that this will help with the stated problem, but there might be some solution lurking in that capability. Richard Riehle