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: 103376,7a3b1c6915ea1273
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Received: by 10.205.127.3 with SMTP id gy3mr585103bkc.1.1327056238980;
        Fri, 20 Jan 2012 02:43:58 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 cj8ni118189bkb.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Brian Drummond <brian@shapes.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How many Ada compiler bugs are here?
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 10:43:57 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <jfbghd$503$1@dont-email.me>
References: <01dd6341-9c3c-4dcb-90f8-6ac66c65eb66@z1g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>
	<jentdh$4sd$1@munin.nbi.dk>
	<491fa855-f420-4701-a51a-39ac5a0cb63c@p42g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>
	<cd10ed1a-6307-42cc-84db-f4c0a73d342f@34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 10:43:57 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="DkTdSjxOCm6DqG+Uf7eArg";
	logging-data="5123"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/2F3bPLz7gmqdxnel1qWdKVBqEmpSFtKo="
User-Agent: Pan/0.134 (Wait for Me; GIT cb32159 master)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5mtsRicBTySp3ZNRaNwkfvMYucg=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-01-20T10:43:57+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 08:35:55 -0800, Adam Beneschan wrote:

> On Jan 14, 2:20 am, Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homep...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Adjust is not called, but I have defined it to check if that's the
>> case.

> I think what Randy was getting at--and I concur with this--is that if
> you can create a *legal* program that has the bug you're concerned about
> (i.e. one that does not try to override a non-existent Adjust), then
> it's a serious problem and you should definitely report it.  But if you
> can't, I wouldn't worry about it.  You're probably thinking that you've
> run across a serious problem in the object model that's **independent**
> of the Adjust visibility issue.  But to me, there's a good chance that
> this problem is intertwined with the Adjust problem, not independent of
> it. 

That was my concern too. However my limited attempts to create a testcase 
for visibility errors independent of controlled types, failed to do so. 
I believe you are correct that it arises out of some special case 
handling, and nothing deeper. 


- Brian