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
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Alejandro R. Mosteo" <alejandro@mosteo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: how to force the Small aspect of a new type derived from the
 generic formal type ?
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 12:13:30 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <p4f2gq$al0$1@dont-email.me>
References: <1aaa851e-495a-4dd4-8db7-0fd84ee8225f@googlegroups.com>
 <p4bj1f$s47$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
 <cb2eaa5d-f40d-4c35-8df4-b1e04d8d5a4b@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:13:31 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="5ca1a45ca47851aacf17019e526d1e22";
	logging-data="10912"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19k23wexre+0/nvr2qPQxEO"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.5.0
In-Reply-To: <cb2eaa5d-f40d-4c35-8df4-b1e04d8d5a4b@googlegroups.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7iOcCJX4f0ory8fU7EhwDieudWY=
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50162
Date: 2018-01-26T12:13:30+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 25/01/18 13:54, Mehdi Saada wrote:
>> Either the teacher is asking for the impossible
> 
> Actually the teacher isn't asking to do that: he asked at some point to make it generic, at and at another, to force the Small. I assumed we could do both.
> 
>> you can't use most representation  aspects on a type derived from a generic formal type.
> 
> I understand. But with this statement:
>     type Modele is delta <>  with SMALL => MODELE'DELTA;
> I intend to pass a contract, so that only types whose Small is set the same as the Delta will be accepted as valid parameters. I SUPPOSED it works like this... I suppose now I was wrong ?
> 

Unfortunately aspects+generics (or, in general <advanced 
feature>+generics) is one of the points where Ada orthogonality breaks 
down. In exchange you get sane generics, when compared to macro templates.

I'm saying this in a practical, user-experience sense, not as a language 
lawyer (which I'm not).

You can somewhat mitigate this with generic package formals, or with the 
"type T is new Base with private" kind of formals.

Even after many years of using Ada, I find the table in the following 
link a lifesaver from time to time:

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming/Generics#Generic_formal_types

Incidentally, I wonder what good Ada cheatsheets are out there.