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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f494beedc5085953
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: george.priv@gmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Obtaining access to protected object
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 19:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <c78104d1-55f2-42d4-8f50-302ff18da3ed@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
References: <72741a06-d96c-4f53-a80b-3595c513efa1@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
	<59ed2f49-92e7-4d9d-b88e-5fbd28824d91@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
	<f1f749f7-05c2-4bb6-8838-1aa0187faded@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.196.71.114
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1215655839 5108 127.0.0.1 (10 Jul 2008 02:10:39
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 02:10:39 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com; posting-host=151.196.71.114;
	posting-account=VnNb3AoAAACTpRtCcTrcjmPX7cs92k1Q
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-Via: 1.1 SPARKS
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US;
 rv:1.8.1.15)
	Gecko/20080623 Firefox/2.0.0.15,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1072
Date: 2008-07-09T19:10:39-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Jul 9, 3:27 pm, Adam Beneschan <a...@irvine.com> wrote:
> On Jul 9, 8:33 am, george.p...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > The instance may not be aliased, and type itself is not enough to
> > determine that at compile time.
>
> Wrong.  The current instance of a protected type is always considered
> aliased, and 'Access is allowed.  3.10(9/2).
>
>                              -- Adam

I may be wrong, but it seems that Aliaseness is guaranteed only within
the protected body. So taking pointer and spilling it outside of the
scope (even if allowed) is bad idea IMHO.  If used inside the
protected body then what's advantage of using pointer vs. referring
directly?

George