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: 103376,e008f8da6c083c62
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!213.200.89.82.MISMATCH!tiscali!newsfeed1.ip.tiscali.net!news.tiscali.de!newsfeed.hanau.net!news-fra1.dfn.de!newsfeed.ision.net!newsfeed2.easynews.net!ision!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Anonymous access types
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <1181294988.270499.202550@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
 <8oh0idncjgii$.1tm1fzqvqv3cb$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1181304599.484497.300470@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 20:08:12 +0200
Message-ID: <r588zk4in1we.192x4riohaidn$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 08 Jun 2007 20:07:52 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 509e9d23.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=TAK5FV3Fce;^8FBo0_81f>A9EHlD;3Yc24Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;^DEodUmV1W4[6LHn;2LCV>[<mhadbfdU;7XGLebX@:T3Cc4Z6B?I>:>
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16120
Date: 2007-06-08T20:07:52+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 05:09:59 -0700, adam.betts155@gmail.com wrote:

> Yep, sorry, was that a typo on my part. I actually did have:
>       new tree'(g.t);
> and not:
>       new tree(g.t);
> 
> Given that, why does the pointer not point to the correct place? Where
> is it pointing to since it is clearly not null and must be pointing to
> a variable of type tree?

Why if it really does? Are you using debugger to verify that?

If g.t is controlled you might need to check what its Adjust does. Is it
deep or shallow copy?

BTW, it is a strange looking design. Provided that get_tree has the copy
semantics, why don't you return the copy, but a pointer to?

function get_tree (g: graph) return tree['Class] is
begin
  return g.t;
end get_tree;

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