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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,25ab365b646cef74
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!194.159.246.34.MISMATCH!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon.j.wright@mac.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT 4.2.3 Ubuntu reports weird compile error wrt
  Unchecked_Access
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:14:40 +0100
Organization: Pushface
Message-ID: <m2wsifo96n.fsf@mac.com>
References: 
 <7053ea09-38cd-4e30-9827-a1384bafd190@p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
 <4a7dd648-fc2d-481c-9e51-8f63d961f01b@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
 <79669a6a-6d90-4025-9fa2-e71bebd659e1@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1218993279 20419 62.49.19.209 (17 Aug 2008 17:14:39
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:14:39 +0000 (UTC)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JOCRQYLBIl+uz9enfLsawHEfkKc=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2.50 (darwin)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1638
Date: 2008-08-17T18:14:40+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Jerry <lanceboyle@qwest.net> writes:

> On Aug 16, 3:26�am, Ludovic Brenta <ludo...@ludovic-brenta.org> wrote:
>> Without more context I cannot tell for sure but I believe this is a
>> compiler error in the sense that gnat-4.2 does not implement all the
>> new (and more permissive) rules in Ada 2005 regarding anonymous access
>> types. gnat-3.2 implements these rules.
>>
>> BTW, I've mentioned already that Ubuntu 8.04 has broken support for
>> Ada. Better stick to Debian.
>>
>> --
>> Ludovic Brenta.
>
> I can quickly get in over my head here and I'm not very familiar with
> anonymous access types, but isn't 'Unchecked_Access a part of Ada 95
> if not 83?

Not 83, I think.

The thing is, 'Unchecked_Access may well be allowed in more places in
'05 than it was in '95; and compilers don't always get this sort of
thing right first time.

GNAT has 'Unrestricted_Access for places where the rules (or the
compiler) don't allow 'Unhchecked_Access.