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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Suggestion: Allow functions returning abstract types in certain
 situations
Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 14:45:42 -0400
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wccoayndnhl.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <lliej8$r67$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <a5c7aaeb-1871-4158-ba3f-189e088e7778@googlegroups.com>
 <wccsio2zt4a.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <06f66a19-00f1-405f-a517-05d18a021b65@googlegroups.com>
 <wcctx8in2iu.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <fda3fecb-98ab-45ad-af8d-4584cae78be6@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls7.std.com 1400957139 21062 192.74.137.71 (24 May 2014 18:45:39
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 18:45:39 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:CtBJGN0KbqxohpkgEdxDMmX0CwY=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:20012
Date: 2014-05-24T14:45:42-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

(sorry for email; I meant to post)

Adam Beneschan <adambeneschan@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 4:19:21 PM UTC-7, Robert A Duff wrote:
>
>> Not sure what you mean about "redispatch".  You can't [re]dispatch
>> without converting to class-wide.
>
> It didn't occur to me until later that your idea about forbidding a
> conversion from an abstract type to a class-wide type has to be a
> run-time check, not a compile-time check (or not solely a compile-time
> check).  Otherwise, if an operation of a concrete type converts a
> controlling parameter to a class-wide type, and then an abstract type
> is derived without overriding the operation, the code would then be
> converting the abstract object to a class-wide type unless it were
> checked at run-time.
>
> That's the sort of scenario I was thinking of when I mentioned
> Initialize/Adjust/Finalize doing a redispatch.

Ah, I see.  That's essentially the same as Dmitry's point 2.
I don't think it's specific to I/A/F.  Yes, it could be a
run-time check, but I'd much prefer a compile-time check,
even if it's rather restrictive.  Currently, dangling dispatch
is prevented by compile-time rules, and I'd like to keep it
that way.

- Bob