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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e1c47fd1b76b1c05
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-fusi.netcologne.de!151.189.20.20.MISMATCH!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Task entries and access to subprograms.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.14.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <4253B917.5070800@mailinator.com>
 <sz05e.2222$yq6.1165@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <4254E00C.30908@mailinator.com> <tIOdnR2ThMvFXcjfRVn-3g@megapath.net>
 <42562996.9010306@mailinator.com> <wcczmw9z5ld.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 17:23:37 +0200
Message-ID: <o5mz7gn3nmqz.12tz3dzg59vvj$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 08 Apr 2005 17:23:36 MEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a9397b3.newsread4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=^K[<P>7_n?7::C@ZGckeZ1:ejgIfPPld4jW\KbG]kaM8FYk:AnJB[C=mG]2aKTWB?9[6LHn;2LCV>7enW;^6ZC`4<=9bOTW=MN>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10336
Date: 2005-04-08T17:23:36+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 08 Apr 2005 10:49:18 -0400, Robert A Duff wrote:

> "Alex R. Mosteo" <devnull@mailinator.com> writes:
> 
>> I see. One thing I've never fully understood (and I'm ashamed to admit
>> it, since I've read and forgotten the rationale at least a couple of
>> times) is why One (Foo'Access) is illegal in your example. This gives
>> multiple headaches (say, using Unchecked_Access :)) in situations who
>> are clearly void of risk.
> 
> Could you please show an example that is void of risk,
> for discussion purposes?

Maybe, not to use pointers? (:-))

(How long it should take to finally have procedural types and objects?
Procedures with results? Return by reference? By-reference discriminants?)

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de