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=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d402e2c741db0d0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-09 15:05:29 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Language lawyer question: Equality on 'Access attributes
Date: 09 Jan 2004 18:05:28 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc8ykgg1tz.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <b4682ab7.0401071805.5bc07078@posting.google.com>
 <4LKdnRRNyv6AlmCiRVn-ig@comcast.com>
 <b4682ab7.0401080918.53ca089@posting.google.com>
 <wcc1xqa1fmj.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <6bSdnYBKy_diPGCi4p2dnA@gbronline.com>
 <wccn08yqhim.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <5a6dnSHERdpJtWOi4p2dnA@gbronline.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pip1-5.std.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1073689528 32702 192.74.137.185 (9 Jan 2004 23:05:28
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:05:28 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4278
Date: 2004-01-09T18:05:28-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Ze Administrator <groleau+news@freeshell.org> writes:

> Robert A Duff wrote:
> > No.  If there are more than one "=" visible that take access-to-integer,
> > then it would be ambiguous.  In the example given, there was only one
> > such "=".  The point is, resolution of "=" is just like any other
> > subprogram.
> 
> There was no definition of "=" in the example,
> nor was there a type definition to imply one.

The example was:

package Pak1 is
    type Ptr1 is access all Integer;
    X : aliased Integer;
    Y : aliased Integer;
    B : Boolean := X'Access = Y'Access;
end Pak1;

and the declaration of Ptr1 causes an implicit declaration of "=".

If that is the *only* visible "=" on access types, then I claim the
above is legal.

> > If you don't believe this is what the RM says (which was the original
> > question), you should quote chapter and verse.  (I admit that this is a
> 
> I don't recall the reference Robert Eachus used.

I don't think he quoted any RM paragraphs.  I didn't either.
But Adam did, and I agreed with his analysis.

> I could go to groups.google.com but arguing is more fun.

;-)

- Bob