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,f2690a5e963b61b6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.megapath.net!news.megapath.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 20:50:23 -0500
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <1120474891.635131.216700@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <1120575076.876798.108220@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <1120583470.429264.325450@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <dsydnQvyH41bxlHfRVn-1w@megapath.net> <uslyrv50w.fsf@earthlink.net>
 <ZZ6dnRlnvPKAA1HfRVn-iQ@megapath.net>
 <3goze.305$dU3.190@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GCC 4.0 Ada.Containers Cursor danger.
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 20:53:31 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4952.2800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4952.2800
Message-ID: <x_ednd1ZeuNC403fRVn-gA@megapath.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.32.209.38
X-Trace: 
 sv3-3QrfUlkIVOeKum6iQ1A+YnNCUT8vcc8cYqMhmJWZMtt54iIff51ApV3DVW1VJ08t2HFqqXe8GiaKjUM!WeRbwb4aOs7nRWxR8gUKdjlc4XC330pbuOHwXuedsxrQw+aAdHOzawdPk1/yqe01NGCYa752YQvi
X-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.32
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11979
Date: 2005-07-09T20:53:31-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Jeffrey Carter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:3goze.305$dU3.190@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Randy Brukardt wrote:
> >
> > Yes, and I agree that is too much overhead. I'm planning to use a serial
> > number scheme. It won't detect every possible error (if the memory for
the
> > element or container as a whole is reused, there would be a very small
> > chance that it would fail to detect an error), but it would catch the
vast
> > majority of them.
>
> Is that like the scheme used by the PragmARC lists? Each list has a
> unique ID, each node contains the ID of the list it's in, and each
> Position has the ID of the list it's a Position for. All three IDs must
> match for an operation to be valid. On deletion, the ID in the node and
> in the Position are made invalid. It won't catch everything, but it
> catches most errors.

Sounds like it. Hope it isn't patented. :-)

                       Randy.