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: a07f3367d7,19b8909eebb73a8e
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!194.25.134.126.MISMATCH!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Question on Controlled types
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <4a211b98$0$2862$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be>
 <1m6a6s5xq3hrf.1i7zbi65wq3cd$.dlg@40tude.net>
  <2f907a62-5ce3-41bc-816b-9efdaf8f2982@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
 <1oa4b8avzgtos.3ofldt4u0hnh.dlg@40tude.net>
 <8e08ed69-e0fb-4584-aa0f-521d472541bf@v4g2000vba.googlegroups.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 17:03:16 +0200
Message-ID: <pk761me7pd9y$.fgwm6pk9h302$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 04 Jun 2009 17:03:16 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: c9d6e713.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=Y>Sd8gQQ8g8gP]QSEBQ^d4ic==]BZ:af>4Fo<]lROoR1^YC2XCjHcb9UD^3igdJ<b:DNcfSJ;bb[5FCTGGVUmh?4LK[5LiR>kg2IaLh@b6a8K2
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6250
Date: 2009-06-04T17:03:16+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 07:34:43 -0700 (PDT), Hibou57 (Yannick Duch�ne) wrote:

> On 4 juin, 16:04, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
>>> So this means that if there was a second assignation of Delay1,
>>> Finalize would be invoked before the copy and the Adjust which will
>>> follow the copy ?
>>
>> Yes.
> 
> So this implies that at execution time, distinction can be made
> between the first and the next assignement.

No, initialization is not an assignment. This difference was subtle in Ada
95, but in Ada 2005 is more obvious. Consider a limited type T and the
function Create that "returns" T:

   X : T := Create; -- This is OK, because it is an initialization
begin
   X := Create; -- This is illegal, because it would be an assignment

Further within Create:

function Create return T is
begin
   return X : T [do ... end return]; -- This OK
end Create;

function Create return T is
   X : T;
begin
   return X;  -- This is not OK, because it returns a local
                -- limited object X, which is semantically equivalent
                -- to an assignment
end Create;

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