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: 103376,6009c73a58f787a0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-01-11 06:49:25 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!uunet!ash.uu.net!world!news
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: How to avoid unreferenced objects (mutexes etc)
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Message-ID: <wccadvlc5bp.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 14:47:38 GMT
References: <3c3ee8c8.105408250@News.CIS.DFN.DE>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18777
Date: 2002-01-11T14:47:38+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

dmitry@elros.cbb-automation.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) writes:

>    Temp : Lock (Mutex_of_a_resource'Access);

> The problem is that the object Temp is never referenced. The compiler
> complains of that, but it is a minor problem. The questions are
> 
> 1. Has the compiler right to optimize out Temp?

No.  There are some extra permissions to "optimize" away pseudo-dead
variables of a non-limited type, even when init/fin have side effects.
(there's an AI on that.)  But your type is limited, and therefore immune
to such meddling.

> 2. Is there a better solution?

Your solution is fine.

- Bob