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: "J-P. Rosen" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: little precision about anonymous access types Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:36:12 +0200 Organization: Adalog Message-ID: References: <42387d28-c983-4e58-9522-815ccd1ad0fb@googlegroups.com> <6c1e643d-b826-4b8b-b61c-13c56428ed23@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: XdjV4tYMtFfMKGpv0MuDzQ.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3 Content-Language: fr Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:52410 Date: 2018-05-17T23:36:12+02:00 List-Id: Le 17/05/2018 à 23:17, Randy Brukardt a écrit : > No, I wouldn't bother with dispatching on access values at all. Since Ada > passes all tagged objects by reference, and 'Unchecked_Access is always > allowed on tagged parameters, it's always possible to get an access to a > tagged parameter if that is needed. There's no reason to *pass* that value - > just pass the tagged object. Hmm... I don't remember the details, but wasn't it necessary for RACW (Remote Access to Class Wide) types? -- J-P. Rosen Adalog 2 rue du Docteur Lombard, 92441 Issy-les-Moulineaux CEDEX Tel: +33 1 45 29 21 52, Fax: +33 1 45 29 25 00 http://www.adalog.fr