ambiguous names

ambiguous names

[Maxim Reznik]

Trying to understand paragraph 4.1.3.13 of ARM:

* If the prefix does not denote a package, then it shall be a 
*direct_name or an expanded name, and it shall resolve to denote a 
*program unit (other than a package), the current instance of a type, a 
*block_statement, a loop_statement, or an accept_statement (in the case 
*of an accept_statement or entry_body, no family index is allowed); the 
*expanded name shall occur within the declarative region of this 
*construct. Further, if this construct is a callable construct and the 
*prefix denotes more than one such enclosing callable construct, then 
*the expanded name is ambiguous, independently of the selector_name.

I wroute a program:

procedure A is
    B : Boolean;
    X : Integer;

    procedure A is
       B : Integer;
    begin
       X := A.B;  -- ambiguous ?
    end A;

begin
    null;
end A;

I think there is an ambiguous name A.B in assignment statement.
"A" denotes two procedures and they are callable constructs.
But GNAT doesnt complain.

Could Ada lawyers explain me my fault and/or give me an example
of ambiguity of a prefix?

Please

Re: ambiguous names

[David C. Hoos]

The inner A hides the outer A within the scope of the inner A.
Thus, there is no ambiguity.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Maxim Reznik" <max1@mbank.com.ua>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
To: <comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 9:50 AM
Subject: ambiguous names


> Trying to understand paragraph 4.1.3.13 of ARM:
> 
> * If the prefix does not denote a package, then it shall be a 
> *direct_name or an expanded name, and it shall resolve to denote a 
> *program unit (other than a package), the current instance of a type, a 
> *block_statement, a loop_statement, or an accept_statement (in the case 
> *of an accept_statement or entry_body, no family index is allowed); the 
> *expanded name shall occur within the declarative region of this 
> *construct. Further, if this construct is a callable construct and the 
> *prefix denotes more than one such enclosing callable construct, then 
> *the expanded name is ambiguous, independently of the selector_name.
> 
> I wroute a program:
> 
> procedure A is
>     B : Boolean;
>     X : Integer;
> 
>     procedure A is
>        B : Integer;
>     begin
>        X := A.B;  -- ambiguous ?
>     end A;
> 
> begin
>     null;
> end A;
> 
> I think there is an ambiguous name A.B in assignment statement.
> "A" denotes two procedures and they are callable constructs.
> But GNAT doesnt complain.
> 
> Could Ada lawyers explain me my fault and/or give me an example
> of ambiguity of a prefix?
> 
> Please
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> comp.lang.ada mailing list
> comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
> http://ada.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada
> 

Re: ambiguous names

[Pascal Obry]

"David C. Hoos" <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com> writes:

> The inner A hides the outer A within the scope of the inner A.
> Thus, there is no ambiguity.

Right and to access outer one you must use "Standard.A.B".

Pascal.

-- 

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
--|
--| gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-key C1082595

Re: ambiguous names

[Maxim Reznik]

David C. Hoos wrote:
> The inner A hides the outer A within the scope of the inner A.
> Thus, there is no ambiguity.


> ----- Original Message ----- 
> Subject: ambiguous names
> 
>>Trying to understand paragraph 4.1.3.13 of ARM:
>>
[skip]

Thank you!
Now I see my mistake. And right example of such ambiguous is

procedure A(C : Integer)  is
     B : Boolean;
     X : Integer;

     procedure A is
        B : Integer;
     begin
        X := A.B;  -- ambiguous !
     end A;

begin
     null;
end A;

Now GNAT points to ambiguous prefix.

Max