Re: A simple ADA puzzle (I haven't the answer)

["Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net>]

"Abby" <none@no.one.it> wrote in message
news:4x_zc.40702$G%.32360@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
>
> Thanx for your answer. Sorry if I don't show you well what my problem is,
I
> try again ;) : I have the structure as in my first post and I can't change
> it, I mean, "someone" wrote that type and I must use it so i need to
declare
> a variable of that "monstrous" type and I can't change that type in
anyway.
> DO you know some way to declare and use it without any constraint error?
> Thanx again!

Which types can't you change? Just STRING_TYPE? If so, you can go with my
second solution.

If no changes can be made in any of the declarations through UNC_ARRAY_TYPE,
then you have an impossible task. These declarations are very badly written,
and I find it quite implausable that they were ever used in any real,
working application. Any object of type UNC2_ARRAY_TYPE with more than a few
components would use up all available memory. For this reason, it is hard to
believe that an object of type RET2_TYPE with a Init more than 3 was ever
created, so an unconstrained object of this type is completely out of the
question. But wait! It gets worse: an unconstrained object of type RET_TYPE
must have enough space for INTEGER'LAST unconstrained objects of type
RET2_TYPE. Finally, we need 3 of these RET_TYPE objects! No wonder
Constraint_Error was raised; the run time generated an arithmetic overflow
when computing the amount of space required.

My guess is that these declarations were written by someone who performed no
other check on the code other than whether it compiles. These declarations
are unusable, and that is reason enough to refuse to use them.

If you provide more details about what this code is supposed to do, I could
advise you as to how these type declarations should be written.