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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7d242658229865c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: Abstract Completion Question
Date: 1999/03/05
Message-ID: <wccu2vz7uxk.fsf@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 451610360
Sender: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
References: <7bmjrp$5u5$1@plug.news.pipex.net>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-03-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> writes:

> -- Consider the following code:
> 
> with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO;
> 
> procedure Test_1 is
> 
>    package P1 is
>       type T1 is abstract tagged null record;
>       procedure A (X: in T1) is abstract;
>    end;
> 
>    type T2 is new P1.T1 with
>       record
>          Data: String(1..10) := "***DATA***";
>       end record;
> 
>    procedure A (X: in T2) is
>    begin
>       Put_Line(X.Data);
>    end;
> 
>    type T1CA is access all P1.T1'Class;
> 
>    Y: aliased T2;
>    Z: T1CA := Y'Access;
> 
> begin
> 
>    P1.A(Z.all); -- dispatching call
> 
> end;
> 
> -- The operation "A" of type "T2" is overridden, so fulfilling the promise
> -- of type "T1" (as far as Ada is concerned).  This program compiles
> -- and runs (GNAT 3.11p Win32), but nevertheless "A" is not a primitive
> -- operation of "T2" (because it is not declared in a package spec), so
> -- "A" cannot be dispatched to.  Upon executing this program under
> -- GNAT, Constraint_Error is raised.  This behaviour could be a
> -- 'surprise' for users (a nasty one).  Comments?

Procedure A of T2 *is* primitive, because it overrides.  See 3.2.3(7).
The call should dispatch to this procedure A, as you would expect.

It's not clear to me why it's raising C_E -- perhaps a compiler bug, or
perhaps something I'm missing in the above code.

A language design goal was, "no dangling dispatching".  If you can
dispatch (legally at compile time), then there must be a procedure there
(at run time) to dispatch to.  If you find a violation of that
principle, I want to hear about it!

- Bob
-- 
Change robert to bob to get my real email address.  Sorry.