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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9240e56bacaf630,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: lutz@iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)
Subject: Generic abstract procedures
Date: 1999/10/14
Message-ID: <slrn80biot.19p.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 536637343
Distribution: world
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Organization: IKS GmbH Jena
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.5.7 (UNIX)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-10-14T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Of course, RM 6-1(20) says:
    A subprogram_declaration or a generic_subprogram_declaration requires a
    completion: a body, a renaming_declaration (see 8.5), or a pragma Import
    (see B.1). A completion is not allowed for an
    abstract_subprogram_declaration.

Even RM 12-6(16) clarifies in Note (18):
    The actual subprogram cannot be abstract (see 3.9.3).

And so RM 3-9(11)
    A generic actual subprogram shall not be an abstract subprogram. ...

Does anybody knows a solution other than derivating the actual collection
from an abstract tagged type? Obviously I failed with a dumb generic attempt.

But I love it.