Re: Unchecked_Deallocation with tagged types

["Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>]

On 4/20/21 5:57 PM, Stephen Leake wrote:
> "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org> writes:
> 
>> package Lists is
>>     type Handle is tagged limited private;
>>
>>     procedure Clear (List : in out Handle);
>>
>> and then use
>>
>>     List : Lists.Handle;
>>
>>     List.Clear;
> 
> Just to provide an alternative, I like:
> 
>   package Lists is
>      type List is tagged limited private;
> 
>      procedure Clear (List : in out Lists.List);
> 
>   and then use
> 
>      List : Lists.List;
> 
>      List.Clear;

Lists.List is a bit repetitive. Are you sure you don't want 
Lists.Listy_List_Listing?

> that saves you having to think up a bogus name for the 'list' type.

I think of private types as allowing you to manipulate their abstraction without 
know how it's implemented, much as the handle on a suitcase allows you to 
manipulate its contents without knowing what's in there. So Handle seems an 
appropriate name.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"I'm particularly glad that these lovely children were
here today to hear that speech. Not only was it authentic
frontier gibberish, it expressed a courage little seen
in this day and age."
Blazing Saddles
88