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,daf1e35a4e978e9d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-20 07:23:12 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!uunet!sea.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!news
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Subject: Re: have to use unrestricted access but just what about access
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Message-ID: <wccznxqni7o.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 14:22:03 GMT
References: <0x8Q8.6779$ZP1.1263481@news11-gui.server.ntli.net>
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:26486
Date: 2002-06-20T14:22:03+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"chris.danx" <spamoff.danx@ntlworld.com> writes:

> How can the unrestricted_access attribute be replaced by just access in the
> following code?

You should be using 'Unchecked_Access here, which is a standard feature
of Ada (albeit unsafe).

'Unrestricted_Access is a feature of GNAT, and is not necessary in your
example.

- Bob