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!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!newsfeed.xs3.de!io.xs3.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Formal Subprogram Access
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 18:57:47 -0600
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <p601ic$hqf$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: <p5l6bd$ete$1@dont-email.me> <p5lne2$fe9$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
 <p5mflm$ibq$1@dont-email.me> <p5tudq$5eb$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
 <p5v7ja$vbq$1@dont-email.me>
 <1f226b44-eff5-4d54-bacf-07e2303f1b50@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 00:57:48 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="18255"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50437
Date: 2018-02-13T18:57:47-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"AdaMagica" <christ-usch.grein@t-online.de> wrote in message 
news:1f226b44-eff5-4d54-bacf-07e2303f1b50@googlegroups.com...
> So taking everything together, and as a generic body assumes the worst, 
> 'Access should be forbidden for generic subprogram parameters.
>
> I cannot find such a rule in the RM. Looks like an oversight?

I doubt that we could change this at this late date (20+ years) even if it 
was an original mistake.

> Is this worth a note in Ada Comment?

Up to you.

> As Randy said, generic parameter subprograms should be wrapped in a local 
> subprogram for 'Access - or do I misinterprete him?

No, I said that the *compiler* has to wrap generic actual subprograms. (For 
Janus/Ada, we have to do that for all subprograms, because of generic 
sharing and the possibility that the parameters change subtypes, or have a 
deeper level, or many other things. So this is a non-problem for Janus/Ada 
in any case.) So far as I can tell, they have to have an Ada convention, so 
they have the be wrapped if the convention is anything else [and that 
matters].

Note that the same issue comes up when passing predefined operators 
(probably a more realistic case).

                                        Randy.