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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no 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!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.datemas.de!rt.uk.eu.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT GPL 2013 bug? Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 13:01:21 +0200 Organization: cbb software GmbH Message-ID: References: <19fr4wmxmen$.gjbias2fj461$.dlg@40tude.net> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: akU61YSCmz18VAS8AmGZtg.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:16714 Date: 2013-08-09T13:01:21+02:00 List-Id: On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 03:38:21 -0700 (PDT), sbelmont700@gmail.com wrote: > Aren't dispatching access parameters inherently always 'not null' anyway, > and the explicit qualifier just an optional readability thing? No idea, but since Ada 2005 access T can be null. Is the behavior depends on whether the parameter is dispatching? So considering: type Q is null record; procedure P (X : access Q) is null; Y : access Q := null; begin P (Y); -- This is OK (since Ada 2005) Now add "tagged" to Q: type Q is tagged null record; procedure P (X : access Q) is null; Y : access Q := null; begin P (Y); -- This is not OK? I didn't searched ARM for this, but if indeed so, this is a language bug to me. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de