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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.58.128.67 with SMTP id nm3mr778424veb.38.1384875938083; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 07:45:38 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.50.80.78 with SMTP id p14mr471596igx.6.1384875938036; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 07:45:38 -0800 (PST) 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.glorb.com!news-out.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!209.85.216.88.MISMATCH!i2no5948119qav.0!news-out.google.com!9ni36578qaf.0!nntp.google.com!dz2no1306370qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 07:45:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <523174ae-c1fc-40e0-a940-12f1665fa2fc@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=RxNzCgoAAACA5KmgtFQuaU-WaH7rjnAO NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 References: <523174ae-c1fc-40e0-a940-12f1665fa2fc@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Strange instantiation error with formal packages From: Adam Beneschan Injection-Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 15:45:38 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:17730 Date: 2013-11-19T07:45:37-08:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:08:09 AM UTC-8, AdaMagica wrote: > Hm, the code looks OK. Unfortunatly I have no other compiler to try (are = there currently any others for Ada 2012?) >=20 >=20 >=20 > I suggest writing a problem report. It doesn't need to be an Ada 2012 compiler; this code has only Ada 95 featu= res. I just tried it on a different compiler and it compiles fine; further= more, I don't see any errors in the code. I don't believe that there were = any changes to Ada 2012 that would turn this kind of legal code into illega= l code. (They try hard to maintain backward compatibility.) And in any ca= se, GNAT gets the same error in gnat2005 mode. So this definitely appears = to be a compiler bug. -- Adam