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: a07f3367d7,5d4ade2fd8fd67c6
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!a2g2000prf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Legit Warnings or not
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 13:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <b760b2c4-b774-43b6-b29e-4882470be1f4@a2g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <531193e0-3305-4292-9ed8-0176226c1d00@x12g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
 <j086nn$aau$1@tornado.tornevall.net> <j08sp2$8qi$2@dont-email.me>
 <3e8384ce-e18a-4d84-95d7-f4eb750b16c9@u6g2000prc.googlegroups.com>
 <wcc4o2fbpzs.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1311279121 15007 127.0.0.1 (21 Jul 2011 20:12:01
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 20:12:01 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: a2g2000prf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122;
 posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: ARLUEHNKC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0; WOW64;
 Trident/4.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR
 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30618; .NET4.0C),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20281
Date: 2011-07-21T13:12:00-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Jul 21, 8:41=A0am, Robert A Duff <bobd...@shell01.TheWorld.com>
wrote:
> Adam Beneschan <a...@irvine.com> writes:
> > You don't have to allocate a whole new Warned_Person, just a new Name.
>
> Right. =A0If you allocate a whole new Warned_Person, you can get
> dangling pointers and dangling renamings. =A0If I remember correctly,
> the rules prevent renaming or 'Access of parts of Name (assuming
> it has aliased parts).

3.10.2(26), 8.5.1(5).  However, I think the language now says that
'Access and rename of a component are OK if the discriminated object
is known to be constrained; that means that the implementation has to
be smart enough to know that it can't allocate a new Name in that case
(when the entire record is assigned) but keep the same pointer and
just copy over the data that it points to.

                                 -- Adam