Re: Protected object which never get finalized

["John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid>]

In article <op.u76nzoymvwnd5a@garhos>,
 Hibou57 (Yannick Duchêne) <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote:

> Le Sun, 14 Feb 2010 13:35:47 +0100, John B. Matthews  
> <nospam@nospam.invalid> a écrit:
> > Type A_Type has its own private part, and this seems more comparable to
> > the declaration of protected type B_Type. Is there any reason to make
> > A_Type more opaque?
> >
> Well, let say first I don't like the idea of designing with a 
> compiler bug  is mind, and secondly, this is not to be part of a 
> public part (I don't  really like private stuff in public part). When 
> I know a mostly clean workaround, that's Ok, but I do not like this  
> one.
> TBH, as was trying (as explained in the initial post), to workaround  
> another bug when I meet this one. The interesting point to me, is 
> that you get the same, so it is not just  my compiler. This means for 
> me I should report the bug to AdaCore (as you  seem to have confirmed 
> the bug).

I wish I could claim to understand it well enough to say one way or the 
other. Given the desired declaration,

    package P is 
       type A_Type is limited private; 
    private 
       protected type A_Type is 
       private 
          Spy : Spies.Instance_Type 
            (Client_Name => new String'("P.A_Type")); 
       end; 
    end P; 

is "protected type A_Type" a valid completion of "type A_Type is limited 
private;" or is that irrelevant?

> I thank you for the test you've made :)

You're welcome; thank you for an interesting example.

-- 
John B. Matthews
trashgod at gmail dot com
<http://sites.google.com/site/drjohnbmatthews>