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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: hreba Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Accessibility check failed Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 13:45:36 -0300 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net STAY0cx7Kxq+bVn5oYbelQlTV3T7VN3m+zFFaiqHPKrOirUY/k Cancel-Lock: sha1:k9A8Qmv5kHa6TJk1HkUAIBeqwXE= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:21665 Date: 2014-08-11T13:45:36-03:00 List-Id: On 08/11/2014 02:32 AM, Jeffrey Carter wrote: > On 08/10/2014 07:12 PM, hreba wrote: >> >> in Proc generates a "accessibility check failed" error. > > Accessibility checks are a major can of worms and why you should always > avoid visible access types if at all possible. This is aggravated by the > use of anonymous access types. > >> So what is wrong? > > The simple answer is unnecessary use of a visible access type, in this > case an anonymous access type. > Ok, the idea is to have an iteration where an abstract procedure is applied on each element of a list, class-wide. Together with the concrete extension of the list element a concrete iterator with a concrete method Proc shall be defined. How do I change my program into proper Ada style? -- Frank Hrebabetzky +55 / 48 / 3235 1106 Florianopolis, Brazil