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: 103376,8a6e6d9458ae6ddc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit From: Brian May Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is this a bug? References: <5ad0dd8a.0409221652.6a69b336@posting.google.com> <5ad0dd8a.0409230035.337f9305@posting.google.com> <2rg6a1F1arg02U1@uni-berlin.de> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:26:34 +1000 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:FxaWtrH8yNM9KDick8jyLLnFvQs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl-202-173-153-89.vic.westnet.com.au X-Trace: news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com 1095978384 202.173.153.89 (24 Sep 2004 08:26:24 +1000) X-Complaints-To: abuse@pipenetworks.com X-Abuse-Info: Please forward all headers to enable your complaint to be properly processed. Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!news1.optus.net.au!optus!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.alphalink.com.au!news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com!not-for-mail Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4056 Date: 2004-09-24T08:26:34+10:00 List-Id: >>>>> "Nick" == Nick Roberts writes: Nick> Wojtek Narczynski wrote: >> Okay, I wasn't thinking. It obviously isn't a compiler bug. Nick> To clarify (hopefully), there is a line which changes the Nick> value of Current_Hook: Nick> Current_Hook := Current_Hook.all.Down'Unchecked_Access; Nick> The value of Current would not have been changed by this Nick> statement, so it would presumably have been left referring Nick> to the wrong thing. The code shown is quite complex, and Nick> Wojtek can be forgiven for initially missing this (in my Nick> humble opinion). So another words, if I did the following: declare ... Current : Bucket_Access renames Current_Hook.all; begin ... Current_Hook := ... end; Then Current would still be the same object and value it use to be? If so, then "renames" isn't quite as simple as I thought. It is more like a "hard link" then a "symbolic link". i.e. it links to the object rather then the name of the object. Interesting. Question: If you freed the value (with unchecked_deallocate) of "Current_Hook" would the value of "Current" still be valid? I suspect it would not be valid, as "Current" is now dangling. -- Brian May