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,e1e2bc096a996632
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: why can't we declare unconstrained objects ?
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:47:18 +0100
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <gfemos7j5yhx$.1xk8qtzdu7s4x$.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <fa59671.0412120743.5cc44da6@posting.google.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net Tp82BEhhCrvxZf1rW3Ny8QLSZZIQMEUOSnjfOWdndly0QHAmA=
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.12.1
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6904
Date: 2004-12-12T18:47:18+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 12 Dec 2004 07:43:21 -0800, Michael Mounteney wrote:

> Is there a simple way in Ada of simulating C/C++ unions ?  It seems to
> me that this is gratuitously prevented, that is, it can be done with
> safety, by extending an existing run-time check, but it is in fact
> prevented by the compiler.
> 
> Hopefully the following commented source will illustrate my point.
> 
> with Ada.text_IO;
> 
> procedure unconstrained is
> 
> 	-- Very simple discriminated type
> 	type thing (what : Boolean) is

Provide default:

   type thing (what : Boolean := False) is ...

this will make it...

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de