From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Blady <p.p11@orange.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Renaming primitives.
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:09:38 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <unoep3$2uqo6$2@dont-email.me>
References: <unls1j$2f0up$3@dont-email.me> <unnj4v$2nj5s$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:09:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3c51d50ffdb2a9483b64bc8ff7220ce6";
	logging-data="3107590"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+qFKP0z9Z70Q6iFlTYCx9F"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Cidk63tARXqr7x2bbWhHky437j4=
In-Reply-To: <unnj4v$2nj5s$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: fr, en-US
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:65984
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le 11/01/2024 à 03:18, Randy Brukardt a écrit :
> "Blady" <p.p11@orange.fr> wrote in message
> news:unls1j$2f0up$3@dont-email.me...
>> Is a procedure renaming equivalent to a simple call?
> 
> General point: "Equivalent" is never true in programming language design. If
> construct A is equivalent in every way to construct B, then they have to be
> the same construct.
> 
> For instance, in your example below, the two subprogram declarations have
> different identifiers which have different visibility (two declarations
> cannot be at exactly the same place), so there is at least one way that
> they're not equivalent.
> 
> So, if you want to talk about "equivalence", you need to qualify that by
> what properties you are interested in.

Well, I hadn't find a better word :-(

> ...
>> What is happening if My_Generic_Handler change?
> 
> Nothing. The names in a renaming are evaluated when the renaming is
> declared. If there are parts that could change, the compiler has to save the
> values at the point of the renaming. That's true for all forms of renaming
> (some names, like package names, can't change meaning so the example isn't
> possible, of course).

Yet, the code:
    My_Log_3 ("Hei");
    My_Generic_Handler := My_Full_Handler'Access;
    My_Log_3 ("Hei");
gives:
Hei
Full Hei

I thought that was correct, wasn't it?
GNAT issue ?

> ...
>> I got:
>> test_20240110_renproc.adb:47:14: error: too many arguments in call to
>> "log"
>>
>> Is it a correct or a GNAT issue?
> 
> Looks like a bug to me. Not too surprising, though, this sort of thing is a
> special case in a compiler and often added to pass an ACATS test or user bug
> report. Such fixes can often not be fully general.

Thanks, I'll report it.

Pascal.