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!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: article on acces types and dynamic serialization in Ada (2003)
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 10:16:22 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <p6m1p6$r8s$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <503e3322-ee8e-4d6f-9aa5-e7b98f87e8f8@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: MyFhHs417jM9AgzRpXn7yg.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.6.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3
Content-Language: en-US
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50543
Date: 2018-02-22T10:16:22+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 22/02/2018 00:57, Mehdi Saada wrote:

> I already mailed you Simon Wright about it, but I've more info and questions, so it put it here. First the context:
> I played with streams yesterday to learn more, and stumbled on something not really intuitive, at least. what means exactly Some_access_type'Write(Stream1, Some_Pointer) ?

Bug, unless

1. 'Write is overridden, e.g. to flatten the pointer;

2. Stream is used for communication inside the same program, e.g. the 
pointer is simply marshaled.

Linked data serialization requires more work and is usually far less 
straightforward than mere writing pointers. There are many approaches to 
that, e.g. external reference counted objects etc. All this is not 
really related to streams.

P.S. You should simply follow the rule: never ever use predefined 
'Read/'Write/'Input/'Output, except for the case #2, which is probably 
well under 1%.

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