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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1556a5535c129d37
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Matthew Heaney <matthew_heaney@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Is this code legal
Date: 1999/06/12
Message-ID: <m3vhctqf5d.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 488892790
References: <929221299.108.55@news.remarQ.com>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 14:25:53 PDT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-06-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 12 Jun 1999 15:59, "Chad R. Meiners" <crmeiners@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I have fixed the code by changing the True_Buffer declaration to an
> assignment as opposed to a renaming.
>
> I was wondering such a renaming is legal in Ada 95 since True_Buffer
> is an Unbounded_String and Command_Buffer is a function.

In Ada95, functions return "constant objects" (as opposed to "values,"
which is what functions returned in Ada83), so renaming the result of a
function call should be legal.

Maybe you have an aliasing problem???  I'm not sure...

Matt