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
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!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Deallocating an object twice
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 22:55:50 +0300
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <lr1142$log$1@speranza.aioe.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rFX7cZOSaeuGGZI2vwQTaQ.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: KNode/4.12.4
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:21264
Date: 2014-07-26T22:55:50+03:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

If I understand correctly, it is an undefined behavior (or is it called 
unbounded error?) if a pool access is deallocated twice with 
Unchecked_Deallocation.

I think it should be a Program_Error (if checks are on).

Why was not this done even in Ada2012 (not speaking about older Ada)?

It's bad.

Or is it done and I just miss it?

-- 
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org