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-Thread: 103376,dbcfe2b0a74da57e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Inherited Methods and such
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 08:21:45 -0400
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wccodfppqg6.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <1190213376.707449.146640@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
 <1fl2wnziigxfd.1fjbag2hh8sbc$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1190239986.762473.204290@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
 <1rw45b3rmvmcr$.1df4wst5oknbl$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1190296353.624737.150940@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>
 <11m13st1f92kf$.m8s6y8mc8ebk.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1190321119.206313.65290@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>
 <egz670qwxgyj$.15oz5zin5794w$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1190408526.100291.265040@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
 <9ukf2wtqjs0q$.iuijmal4x56b$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1190497995.498679.119190@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
 <1mw3qju08q8uj.sgzht7ld9ydc$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1190579805.451187.71140@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
 <1i8ksr774bjbj.vpmnx3c0i9qz.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1190646125.024072.310020@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
 <1r9s9v6pcjifl.vp4ktk0unpd1.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1190753631.240548.101820@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1190809305 17402 192.74.137.71 (26 Sep 2007 12:21:45
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 12:21:45 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DzfAtesvoz91v4xbkRQr8HD5dfg=
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:2138
Date: 2007-09-26T08:21:45-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com> writes:

> The above program prints 0 as the value of an object which type is
> range 10 .. 20.

Well, it happens to print 0 in one implementation.
According to the RM, this is a bounded error, and
it could just as well raise an exception (or print
some other bogus value).

Is this something fundamentally broken about constructors,
or is just another case of uninitialized variables?
I mean, there are lots of other ways to create uninit vars
in Ada...

> What's even more funny, I can add the following inside Some_Operation
> for S:
>
> declare
>    J : R := X.I;  -- at this point X.I = 0
> begin
>    Put (R'Image (J));
> end;
> 
> Guess what will happen. No constraint_error and 0 is assigned to J.
             ^^^^ might

> Why? Because the poor compiler assumed that if X.I is of type R, then
> no checks are necessary.

Right.  Or it might raise an exception.  I don't find this "more funny"
-- it's equally funny as the previous case of printing 0.

- Bob