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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: When to expect bugs fixed?
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2014 22:41:49 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <lywq7eh7bm.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <m3350l$jg4$1@speranza.aioe.org>
	<87fve2u876.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="e614caa3bbcdcdac946afd88f128a08d";
	logging-data="9877"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+9TNuH3WvKYFn1UNYq0mL3UhNRJhBGFLo="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:o8ZB3BhwB/W5Bx98J6Nb+N7X6B0=
	sha1:AYyLUIVmVLMbYWcDKIWI7Exxl4g=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:22969
Date: 2014-11-01T22:41:49+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:

> Victor Porton writes on comp.lang.ada:
>> I reported some Ada compiler bugs in the GCC bugzilla. Will these bugs
>> fixed only after the appearance of GNAT 2015, or is there a hope that
>> they will be fixed sooner?

>> I work on a non-commercial open source project, but my work is paused
>> now due GNAT bugs.
>
> I suggest you try to work around these bugs and not wait.  I've been
> working on mission-critical software for years now, with a support
> contract, but we've never been blocked by compiler bugs.  There is
> always a way around, sometimes a temporary one until the bug is fixed.

As a for-instance, you can work round PR62235 by changing

========================================================================
generic
   type Record_Type; -- It should be an untagged record for C compatibility
package RDF.Auxilary.Handled_Record is

   type Access_Type is access Record_Type
      with Convention=>C;
========================================================================
by
========================================================================
generic
   type Record_Type; -- It should be an untagged record for C compatibility
   type Record_Type_Access is access Record_Type; -- should have convention C
package RDF.Auxilary.Handled_Record is

   subtype Access_Type is Record_Type_Access;
========================================================================

(I guess the new formal_incomplete_type_declaration stuff is a bit
fragile)