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: 103376,53dee61641b15f6c X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.228.227 with SMTP id sl3mr9123152pbc.5.1340225218435; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 13:46:58 -0700 (PDT) Path: l9ni169pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Adam Beneschan Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Bug or feature: representation makes aliasing with renaming declaration an error Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 13:45:28 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <4fe22876$0$9510$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1340225218 26304 127.0.0.1 (20 Jun 2012 20:46:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 20:46:58 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <4fe22876$0$9510$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Date: 2012-06-20T13:45:28-07:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 12:46:09 PM UTC-7, Georg Bauhaus wrote: > Hi, > > Compiling: aliasing.ads (source file time stamp: 2012-06-20 19:41:48) > > 1. package Aliasing is > 2. > 3. type I is ('a', 'b', 'c'); > 4. for I use (11, 22, 33); --! > 5. > 6. type T is range 1 .. 10; > 7. type Ary is array (I) of aliased T; > 8. type Ptr is access constant T; > 9. > 10. Vs : Ary; > 11. Nm : T renames Vs('b'); > 12. X : Ptr := Nm'Access; > | > >>> prefix of "Access" attribute must be aliased > > 13. > 14. end Aliasing; > > 14 lines: 1 error > > The error goes away when line 4 is commented. > Is this expected behavior or is my compiler confused? This appears to be a compiler bug. -- Adam